Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The ’popish midwife’ : printed representations of Elizabeth Cellier and midwifery practice in late seventeeth… Evenden, Kirstin Jane 1992

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata


831-ubc_1992_fall_evenden_kirsten_jane.pdf [ 2.37MB ]
JSON: 831-1.0086513.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0086513-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0086513-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0086513-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0086513-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0086513-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0086513-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

THE ‘POPISH MIDWIFE’: PRINTED REPRESENTATIONS OF ELIZABETH CELLIER AND MIDWIFERY PRACTICE IN LATE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY ENGLAND By Kirstin Jane Evenden  Certificat en FLS, Universit Laval, B.A., Universit Laval, 1989  1987  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS DEPARTMENT OF FINE ARTS ART HISTORY  We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard  I-,  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA  SEPTEMBER 1992  Kirstin Jane Evenden,  1992  In  presenting at  degree freely  this  the  available  copying  of  department publication  of  in  partial  fulfilment  University  of  British  Columbia,  for  this or  thesis  reference  thesis by  this  for  his  and  scholarly  or  thesis  study.  for  her  I  The  of  Fine  purposes  financial  gain  Date  DE-6 (2/88.)  Columbia  Oct. 13th, 1992  shall  requirements  the agree  that that  agree  may  representatives.  Arts/ Art. History  University of British Vancouver, Canada  I  further  permission.  Department  of  be  It not  Library  the  permission  granted  is  by  understood be  for  allowed  the.  advanced  an  make  shall for  extensive of  my  copying  or  head  that without  it  my  written  ABS TRACT  This thesis investigates the role of print culture in the re-definition of English midwifery practice during the seventeenth century. both visual and textual,  The printed representations, of the Catholic midwife  Elizabeth Cellier in The Popish Damnable Plot 1680),  The Solemn Mock Procession  (BM 1085,  (BM 1088,  1680),  The Happy Instruments of England’s Preservation 1681)  and  (BM 1114,  will serve as a basis for my analysis.  As part of a larger body of Whig imagery produced in London during the Exclusion Crisis of 1679—81,  Cellier’s  representation consistently referred to her alleged role in a  ‘popish plot’ perpetrated by Catholics to kill King  Charles II.  In defining Cellier as part of a treasonous  threat to the nation,  this representation not only  targeted her supposed involvement in criminal activities, but also focussed on her midwifery as being an integral aspect of her criminality. Licensed by the Church of England since 1534, midwifery practice was exclusively the province of women. Cellier’s representation as a  ‘criminal midwife’ occurred  at a time when the traditional societal role and organization of midwifery were being questioned. Increasingly, midwives during this period were criticized both by nonconformist groups critical of the Anglican  rituals of birth,  and by medical practitioners interested  in controlling the supervision of childbirth. My aim in this thesis, Cellier’s representation,  then,  is to explore how  while purporting to report a  crime quite separate from her profession,  would in fact  serve to represent midwifery as a potentially criminal and dangerous practice.  In Chapter One,  I will examine  both the political motivations behind her representation, and the conditions in London for the production and distribution of this type of printed imagery.  Chapter  Two will deal with how the genres representing Cellier were used to construct her as a English national unity,  ‘popish’ threat to  while addressing nonconformist  audiences over the issue of exclusion.  Finally,  in  Chapter Three I will analyze how this criminalized representation of Cellier as  ‘popish’  involved and  coincided with both nonconformist critiques of Anglican birthing rituals and attempts in medical discourse to transform previous childbirth practices into a written form of  ‘professional’ medical knowledge.  The overall  aim is to show how Cellier’s representation was part of the process whereby traditional midwifery practice in England was re-defined,  a process which ultimately  resulted in the marginalization of women from midwifery practice.  Iv  TABLE OF CONTENTS  PAGE ABSTRACT  ii  TABLE OF CONTENTS  iv  LIST OF FIGURES ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS INTRODUCTION  v vi 1  CHAPTER ONE PRINTING, POLITICS AND THE ‘POPISH MIDWIFE’: THE CONTEXT OF REPRESENTATION  10  CHAPTER TWO CONSTRUCTING CELLIER AS ‘POPISH’: THE PROCESS OF REPRESENTATION  31  CHAPTER THREE “AND SO DID SHE SUITABLY MIDWIFE [THE PLOT] INTO ‘POPISH MIDWIFERY’ AS A CRITIQUE OF THE WORLD”: THE PRACTICE  61  FIGURES  95  BIBLIOGRAPHY  103  O O 0) —JO(!)  -  H C)  CD  H-  H-H1P)  ‘z3  Hrt HCDrtO MCD rtM O  LiHP-  C!) -.J(D1)rt  • •çt • • • • • •  • • • MCD •H-  t  CD CD  • • . . • •  • • • •  • •  -<  Fl CD  Q  •  • • •  CD  asQH(fl  H H(i)P) HH-  CO  I,)  •  • . •  •  • • • • •  H  -‘  • • —  •CO • C)  •  • •  CD  0  0  • • • • •  ci——  CDC)  çt H- H ctcyHCO  01  • • • • •  .  —  CD  H C”, CO  •CDQ. •O • • • •  (OCDL CD 0  •  CD rtrt 0 •CD  COO 01  •H-O  •  •p) • Q—..  b’H MO •Qi-I • •  cxJCD COCD  O frhP) H 1J cDrtf— ‘  CI)H CDO  OH MCJ)  C1  MctctD’ CDMHCoCDOO (OH-hP) I H t3 ctH çvfl CD MOCD I-t HM •HH-b’FCDctMO 00H-Oct ct(np) k)H-JQ---. dO 1 COLHIH-O  ctDjO  t’J”’ZIOHF—MCO P)rt3 -H-  d5  ctCD H-M’d o 0  H-CD  •  MH” 0 P) ct  •  H-ct-<Ci Cfl H-ed OrtM t-hCoO H “C) 1 C5IL CD (I)COOI-J(O CDC)M(!) C2-<H—OCDO M C!) 0 H “0  CJS  Fl QCO H-HH-CDO  CD  rtFCs 3CD  o  CD -I1  <dz3  II )  H-bCDCD  H--tF---3 H-H-O  •  CD-b.  •H-  Hft  •CDP’O •  0 0  HLi  -  CDCO  • •  •CD  • •  P)(I) .QCo •QCDH-  CDCD 0 tICD 1 ct  MH-HP)NMd P’OM brtO  -0 (noH-  H-O ct H-QCD (OO Drt  F—-ti’s  H•Q1 •  •  H  •cc •4i .0)0 • ‘H • -s 0  oOL’i P)Q  II  ‘  ‘  CD  C1’-  F-CD  MctH HL-ct -5 1’I (DO CoLi C)  (DO(D  MP)  Hctk< HctOH  H-CDD’H  ML-Il  • •  ctyo  H  Co W—.ct  HF-bHl I—  1H-cn  OC’)HO  OMMCD p)CDO  CD  Cl)  -  3rtfl MOPJ  15ct(D MP) CDH-cI  P’M-  •  0)  CDCDCD CDCI) rtCD MD’ i  -3  (ii  cOfrt)  Q  CD Hl1 Cs (D-JO  H-Q (flOe 3M  H-OCD  W—-3 MLt5  •  0ict -CD  -  CD CD —W  0)-bH—JD) H  -  CDO  —  H-OCD çt H7 (HJCD P’Q  5H• C) CDP HhhOH  o  1tJO  Iopict  OP  1  •  P)O 1 L  -J •  CO  Lxi  0  0  C/)  Lxi  0  H  0  I—a  H Cl)  Vi  ACKNOWLEDGEMENT S  I would like to thank my thesis advisor, Dr. Rose Marie San Juan, and my second reader Dr. Maureen Ryan, for their guidance and assistance during the preparation In addition, I would like to thank my of this thesis. Lastly, I would friend John for his on-going support. like to thank my parents, my sister Maya, and my brother Matthew, for their encouragement and understanding.  CD  0  H  0  o  CD  P)  1<  G)  c  o0 )CD ‘..O o —M) H ‘ø  lCD  co  H  -  ci’-  ‘.QO HHp)%  :io  0 Li  H-C  P)I I 1O ‘1 ø (DCD H 1H (DP-  C,) CD  H  ‘<0 13’3’ ctOCD •  OM,OCD CDctct  rt CD O113O H-H-CDH ct < (I) H-CD CD II OQ,H H  (pp  H-MOH O(D(P) HCDH  ‘QWO  II H CD0t’0 HP)EYCDM H-rt o  jrtHCD ‘tIOH-1 (Dct(DCtH H-fl OHiOO0HHP) P)CHHCD rt ‘< rt H-C OHO3H jOP) 13’ CD ci< P)Ci)’..QCD 1i Qpct  ‘<HCD(D (nOrtIl H-H-OP)P’) F—S OP) 1 P)Hb H -(Dt5  -hc2bc)  -COC/) (DP)CDHO çt( H pJftH(D ‘dH-(DH-  2  INTRODUCTION  The Popish Priests serve their Laity, so do our Physitians serve the commonality of this Nation; namely Hide al from them they can, for they know... that should the vulgar but be a little acquainted with their Mysteries al their jugling and knavery would be seen. ——Nicholas Culpeper, A Directory for Midwives (1660)  Thus Nicholas Culpeper,  a Puritan apothecary  interested in promoting his skills as a new ‘manmidwife’  in London,  ‘betters’, priests’,  criticized his professional  the physicians, by comparing them to the Anglican clergy.  ‘popish  Culpeper’s midwifery  manual was one of many new medical texts on midwifery produced during the seventeenth century which was part of a movement to re-define the midwifery profession. For seventeenth century readers, this criticism of doctors as  ‘popish’  within the context of a midwifery  text may have been easily understood.  However,  several  questions pose themselves to twentieth century readers unfamiliar with such seventeenth century terminology. Particularly, what could the term ‘popish’ have signified for readers that it was used to denounce the traditional medical practice represented by physicians? And what did the tacit statement that the  ‘vulgar’--in  3  this case midwives—-were ignorant have to do with this notion of  ‘popish’ medical practice?  Culpeper’s criticism brings to light the issue I will examine in this thesis:  namely,  the re-definition  of traditional midwifery practice into medical terms through its popular representation as  ‘popish’  in  printed imagery. It is well—established in social and medical histories on English midwifery that during the seventeenth century the profession underwent profound changes which still affect the way childbirth in England is defined,  regulated and supervised today.’  rarely considered in such histories, however,  What is is the  process whereby such changes to midwifery would successfully question and transform previous assumptions 2 about the profession. Printed popular representations of midwives and midwifery of the period provide evidence that this  For an account of how such historical changes still affect contemporary English midwifery in Britain,” The birthing practices see Caroline Flint, “On the brink: Pandora, 1988) 22—39. Midwife Challenge, ed. Sheila Kitzinger (London: 2 Two such works are Irving S. Cutter and Henry R. Viets, A Short History of (Philadelphia and London: W.B. Saunders, 1964) and Audrey Eccies, Midwifery Croom Helm, 1982). Obstetrics and Gynaecology in Tudor and Stuart England (London: While Irving and Cutter examine the ‘rise’ of the medical profession, Eccles discusses the effects of such changes on women midwives and the medical practice generally. It should be noted that two recent studies have attempted to investigate this process of re—definition of midwifery. Elizabeth Harvey, in “Matrix as Metaphor: Midwifery and the Conception of Voice”, in her soon to be published Ventriloquized Feminist Theory and English Renaissance Texts (London: Voices: Routledge, 1992) 140—285, examines how metaphorical references to childbirth and midwifery in English Renaissance poetry were linked to the creation of a new medical discourse on childbirth, and the re-definition of the practice. L.J. Jordanova, in “Gender, Generation and Science: William Hunter’s Obstetrical Atlas,” William Hunter and the eighteenth century Medical World, ed. W.F. Bynum and Roy Porter (Cambridge, New York: CUP, 1985) 385—412, analyzes the anatomical illustrations of a man—midwife’s atlas with a view to establishing how the institutionalization and distribution of such imagery contributed to changes in the societal perception of childbirth.  4  transformation of midwifery practice was by no means a straightforward,  linear ‘development’  of scientific  progress—-a point often argued in medical histories. 3 Instead,  political broadsides and pamphlets,  as well as  midwifery manuals and medical illustrations, were important sites through which new kinds of knowledge about midwifery sought legitimacy in an attempt to discount older assumptions of childbirth. 4 Three prints representing the alleged criminal Elizabeth Cellier as the  ‘Popish Midwife’--The Popish  Damnable Plot,  1680  (Figs.  Procession...,  1680  (Fig.  of England’s Preservation,  1 and 2), 3),  The Solemn Mock  and The Happy Instruments  1680  a focus for this investigation,  (Fig. 5)--will serve as for they provide a  particularly good example of how popular representation functioned to question previous societal perceptions of 5 midwifery and birthing practices.  These  representations reveal that the societal anxieties around the transformation of midwifery practice created Cutter and Viets in A Short History, are quick to assume that the changes to midwifery were caused by the ignorance of midwives and by scientific ‘advancement’ However, we know that during the seventeenth century, the very period in the field. when men were entering the birth chamber for the first time, the bills of mortality document that death at childbirth had actually risen. See Elizabeth Cellier An Answer to his Queries, concerning the Colledg of (written Celleor), To Dr. Midwives (London, January, 1688) 6. ---  A large number of medical manuals of the period still exist; see for example, Nicholas Culpeper, The Directory for Midwives (London, 1660); Sir Theodore Mayerne, Dr. Chamberlain, Mr. Nicholas Culpeper, etc., The Compleat midwife’s practice enlarged (London, 1698); The English midwife enlarged (London, 1682). 5 Elizabeth Cellier was not the only midwife to be stereotyped as a criminal in the See the representation of an anonymous ‘popish midwife’ press during this period. in a set of playing cards representing the Revolution of 1688 and attributed to Francis Barlow reproduced in David Kunzle, History of the Comic Strip (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973), Fig. 5—20. Kunzle suggests that this anonymous woman may be Mary Aubrey who also figures in a print reproduced by Fuchs—Kind, Weiberherrschaft II, Fig.  630,  42.  5  much tension between different perceptions of knowledge about childbirth. Elizabeth Cellier’s representation as  ‘popish  midwife’-—while part of a particular political news production aimed at London nonconformist audiences during the early 1680s—-appeared at a time when traditional midwifery practice was being called into question by both nonconformist groups and medical practitioners. 1534,  Licensed by the Church of England since  traditional midwifery practice until the  seventeenth century had exclusively been the province of women.  Midwives’ duties had included emergency baptism  of the mother or child if they died during birth,  as  well as supervision of the Anglican ritual of ‘churching’  or purification of the new mother.  In  addition to such rituals of birth, midwives were responsible for the determination of abortion and fertility, which,  (il)legitimacy,  under midwives’  jurisdiction, were thus subject to control by the Church.  Increasingly,  however,  nonconformists would  denounce the Anglican rituals of birth and the midwives who practiced them.  Nonconformists were opposed to this  licensed midwifery and the rituals it promoted they condemned as  ‘popish’),  (which  for it was a means through  6  which the Anglican Church attempted to exert its authority over matters of private morality. 6 In addition to the nonconformist critique of licensed midwifery, the English medical community of physicians,  surgeons and apothecaries during the  seventeenth century would also begin to criticize the ability of midwives to supervise the birthing process; these criticisms would increasingly threaten traditional midwifery practice. 7  This intervention in childbirth  was linked to professional competition amongst the various medical practitioners themselves.  Surgeons and  apothecaries began to challenge the authority of the physicians,  who had held sway at the top of the medical  profession’s internal hierarchy since the medieval period.  Physicians,  aspects of medicine,  who dealt with the more theoretical had held the authority to dictate  the mandates of the more practical professions of surgeons and apothecaries.  One way in which surgeons  and apothecaries attempted to define their own professions as different from, physicians,  yet equal to that of  was to claim they had a more valid,  ‘scientific’ knowledge of birth.  Physicians, who  assisted at births only if the mother or newborn were dying, had previously held little authority over the  6 Keith Thomas, 172.  Religion and the Decline of Magic  Ornella Moscucci, The Science of Woman: 1929 (Cambridge: CUP, 1990) 6.  (London:  Peregrine Books,  Gynaecology and Gender in England,  1978) 1800—  7  birthing process itself,  and therefore could not easily  control the movements of surgeons and apothecaries, who, like Nicholas Culpeper,  the London apothecary, began to  practice as so—called ‘men-midwives’. 8 As a result of this medical intervention in the birthing process,  not only would the religious aspects  of birth be radically re-evaluated, but the requirements and qualifications for the practice of women midwives would also change.  While previously women had undergone  an apprenticeship under other senior midwives,  and had  acquired their knowledge of the practice on an oral basis, medical practitioners would increasingly insist on the qualification of women for the profession through the reading of medical texts and anatomy. 9 doctor stated in a midwifery manual of 1698,  As one it was his  purpose to: correct the frequent mistakes of most midwives, who resting too boldly upon the common way of delivering women, neglect all the wholesome and profitable rules of the art. .which concern the anatomical parts of the body.’° Although not directly related to the specific nonconformist critique of the religious functions of midwifery,  such practitioners would attempt to define  midwifery in medical terms,  and by such definition deny  8 Irvine Loudon, Medical Care and the General Practitioner, Clarendon Press, 1986) 24.  1750—1850  (Oxford:  For an account of this process of professionalization of midwifery see Jean Donnison, Midwives and Medical Men (New York: Schocken Books, 1977). 10 The Complete Midwife’s Practice Enlarged (London,  1698) A3.  8  the ritualistic——or ‘popish’-—aspects of midwifery. While the impetus for changes to the religious function of midwifery had its origin in a nonconformist critique of the Anglican Church,  the formation of a new strictly  medical discourse on midwifery was part of a process whereby the different medical professions asserted their authority over the birthing process.  Both critiques of  midwifery manifested themselves in a condemnation of midwifery as a practice.  ‘superstitious’  and outmoded  (ignorant)  The ritualism of traditional midwifery was  detested not only by dissenting groups, but ran counter to the scientism of new developments in medical discourse. My aim in this thesis,  then,  is to analyze how,  at  a time when older notions of midwifery were being repudiated by both nonconformist groups and medical practitioners,  Cellier’s representation was part of this  larger process of transformation of the practice. shall argue that the printed images of Cellier,  I  while  purporting to report a crime quite separate from her profession, would in fact to serve to represent midwifery as a potentially criminal and dangerous practice. I will investigate in Chapter One both the political motivations behind Cellier’s representation, and the conditions in London for the production and distribution of this type of printed imagery.  In  9  Chapter Two I will discuss how the genres representing Cellier constructed her as a  ‘popish’ threat to English  national unity while addressing nonconformist audiences over the particular political issue of exclusion of the Duke of York from succession to the throne in 1680.  I  will then analyze in Chapter Three how this criminalized representation of Cellier as  ‘popish’  involved and  coincided with both nonconformist critiques of Anglican birthing rituals and attempts in medical discourse to transform previous childbirth practices into a written form of  ‘professional’ medical knowledge.  This analysis  will establish how Cellier’s representation was part of the process whereby traditional midwifery practice in England was re-defined,  a process which eventually  resulted in the marginalization of women from midwifery practice.  10  CHAPTER ONE PRINTING, POLITICS, AND THE  ‘POPISH MIDWIFE’:  THE CONTEXT OF REPRESENTATION  During the years 1680—1682,  a number of prints,  broadsides and pamphlets were produced in London which claimed that Elizabeth Cellier, Catholic midwife, King Charles 11.1  a well—known local  was involved in a failed plot to kill The standard press account of this  event stated that Cellier, convicts in Newgate prison,  while providing relief to met Thomas Dangerfield,  upon his release from prison,  who,  had requested that she  store some documents in her Meal Tub until he came to trial.  Through an anonymous tip,  however,  one Sir  William Wailer is reputed to have searched Cellier’s Meal Tub to discover that what Dangerfieid had claimed were his trial papers were in fact documents, produced by Catholic plotters,  allegedly  which falsely accused  local Whigs of a conspiracy to kill the king. 2  Cellier,  who contested this account of what came to be called the ‘Meal Tub Plot’,  was arrested in June of 1680 for her  A large number of pamphlets documenting Cellier’s alleged crimes still exist. See, The New popish sham—plot discovered, or, The cursed contrivance of the for example: Earl of Danby, Mris. Celier... (London: Printed for T. Davies, 1682); The Newgate salutation, or, A dialogue between Sir. W.W. and Mrs. Cellier (London: Printed for the use of the students in Whittingto&s Colledge, 1681?); The midwife unmask’d, or, The popish design of Mrs. Celliers meal—tub plainly made known... (London: Printed for T. Davies, 1680). 2 Fora rendition of this standard press account see The Triall.of Elizabeth Cellier, at the Kings Bench Barr, on Friday June the 11th, 1680 (London: Printed for Randal Taylor, 1680)  11  supposed criminal role in the event.  She was acquitted,  however, then re-arrested for libel in September 1680, found guilty,  and convicted when she attempted to publish  her side of the Meal Tub Plot story in a pamphlet entitled Malice Undefeated.  .  .  .  Of course,  such press  reports of the time cannot be relied upon as accurate representations of  ‘historical fact’.  There is no  evidence--outside of the press documentation--that Cellier ever met with Dangerfield; nor is there anything to suggest that Cellier was ever involved in a conspiracy 4 to kill the King. The subsequent representation of Cellier’s alleged crimes in the London press after her conviction, would invariably focus on the Meal Tub Plot.  however,  This  representation of Cellier was part of a larger output of Country Party street literature produced during the Exclusion Crisis of 1679—81. Party,  The Country Party  as it came to be called),  (or Whig  having the support of  many London nonconformists and Broad Church advocates, had held a majority of the local London government seats since the Act of Indulgence in 1672, which had granted  Or a Brief Relation of the Accusation and Elizabeth Cellier, Malice Undefeated: Deliverance of Elizabeth Cellier (London: Printed for Elizabeth Cellier, 1680) Many historical accounts of The Meal Tub Plot assume that Cellier was responsible See, for example, John Kenyon, The Popish Plot (London: for the plot. Heinemann, 1972) 190, and Keith Thomas, Religion and the Decline of Magic (London: Peregrine Books, 1978) 371. In “Cellier, Elizabeth,” The Dictionary of National Biography, 1937—38 ed, however, it was claimed that the plot had been the creation of Dangerfield, who alleged he had been employed to concoct the ‘sham plot’.  12  dissenters the right to participate in political life. 5 The Exclusion Crisis came to a head when supporters of the Country Party attempted to pass a bill in the House of Commons which would have excluded the Catholic Duke of York,  (in the absence of a legitimate Protestant heir to  King Charles II),  from succession to the throne.  generally feared by nonconformists that the Duke crowned)  It was (if ever  would introduce a more authoritarian form of  government similar to that of France,  which was known to  be intolerant of Protestant minorities.  This assumption,  that Catholicism led to the instatement of absolute monarchy,  was common in England at this time.  In the  words of Sir Henry Capel: From popery came the notion of a standing army and arbitrary power. . .Formerly the crown of Spain, and now France, supports this root of popery amongst us; but lay popery flat, and there’s an end of arbitrary government and power. It is a mere chimera, or notion, without popery. 6 The exclusion of the Duke of York,  a converted Catholic  known for his indifference towards dissenters, then, was deemed necessary by Whig politicians whose main concern was to maintain a nonconformist London government. As a result of fear of the political consequences of a Catholic monarch, much of the Whig nonconformist street The term nonconformists generally refers to those various dissenting Protestant groups outside of the established Church of England. Presbyterians, Baptists and even Quakers actively supported and belonged to the Whig Party. N.H. Keeble, The Literary Culture of Nonconformity in Late Seventeenth Century England (Leicester: Leicester UP, 1987) 60. 6 Quoted in Kenyon,  2.  Il-tic-I-  to  I  0)  I—’  -  to  CI-  H (II  to  Ifri, I  -I  -  (Dlt3H  H,iOto  I-° H100  0IID  HID  II-I0  c-I-il OItic-  (D  -  ID  i  to t0  0  to  H  H-  to 100  -  0)0  to  I-’  to  -  it Hci HC) P3 H  p3  Cl)  H-o  ç)  w  ,  it  oo  CD  CD  ci CD  I-t3  ci  CD  3  CD ci  C) CD H H H-  it  cf  ci HCD H-  ci  ci  Cl)  ci-  cD’ (DID  ° H-I-I  i”--  --to  (DID  Pi  H-ti’  n  rI-arI-  I-’0  to  i  IDH,  —  to  to  H-Il  Ct  0  0H  0D-  J0  flI-  i-’ ID toIDI-I—’ZH  tIC  -  rt  0  o  ‘ ct  0  -t  0 I-I-I  -  c-I-to  ID  WS  c-I--i  -‘ID  Q(D  I-’ H-  1 to  0  1  to  -I--U  t-DOH!1N  -  -  •tLI  to  -‘°  I-IC-IH,  ID00  c-I-H,  --  Ii  0  I-  c-r  Hh  ‘ID CD  -H-Il Il0”< H-to  rfQ  0ID  I—j  (D  P  Ut  t  O<ID CIito rttoto  0 0  toto  0  0c-I-0-  0  Z’ c r 1 trtp’  ,-  cn0  IDrI-  ID  “to  t0 1 C  (DH,  00  ‘s  fl(D  (1piQF— c-rto H,H..  —  to0P)  I-<  I-I00 I10—(D  “0H Hc0  l(D  0IIIfrh  ZrI-IEID L(DIH-(D  L’(DIHorriu,  —H  j--  ‘ I-I  (lI-I  WID  I-  c-tn  tic  top,  WI-I  cto  I.U  Io  Ii-o  ci  i-<  Cl)  F-’-  it  H-  ci CD  co  P3  I  P3  CD  F-’  HC) P3  ci  it H-  P3  CD  H  it  ci  I-d  0 :3  CD 0  ci  :i  I-I  CD  0 ci  CD P3 ci H ‘-<  H)  0  3  H0  0  it CD I-d  it  it P3  CD CD CD 3  HC) CD H-  ci CD ‘ZI ci  ci P3 C) it  0  F-’I-I HC) P3 H  ci-  CD P3  0 H)  3 CD  0  <  CD 3 it H-  C) 0  CD  ci  P3  N CD  ciCD ci H-  P3 ci P3 C)  0  C)  P3 CD  H it  •  ci  H P3  LII 3  CD CD H-  ci 0 I-b CD  CD Hci  ci-  ci0  i.Q  ci ci H-  C)  0  H)  CD  ci-  3  0  H-  ci-  it P3  ci CD CD CD  ci CD  ci CD  -<  b  P3 H  ci  Hci  <  H-  H-  I-b  ci  3  CD  it  H3  ci  ci  I-ti 0  CD  CD  ‘t3  P3  CD ci  C) P3 3  CD  CD  P3 H H CD  ci  CD  CD ci  ci-  Hi  •‘  0 3  H-  it  3  it  CD  3  H-  ci CD  CD  ci  CD ci  0 H)  CD  it  ci  0  ci0  Q  H-  0 it  3  I-<  Hci-  it  P3  ci-  CD ci <  H)  H  H Ci  0 ci it  P3 b  it  C) P3  H  3 H-  ci  iQ  P3 it  H  H0  P3  CD H-  0  CD  P3 CD  ci-  P3  I-ti  it  P3  H-  0  Ci  )  CD  CD C) ci)  CD  it CD 3 Cl) H-  0 CD  P3 i  H it  P3 H H  ci-  3  H P3  CD X I-d  3 CD  0  •  CD  H-  l  C)  CD I-I ‘-<  •  OD  H) CD  H-  Hci  ci  ci-  H  P3  CD  -  CD  ‘  HCD  0  I-C5  -  CD  it  CD  P3  H -<  H  C) P3  H 0  ‘s 3 0  CD  C) P3  CD  b  CD  CD  P3 Ci CD  CD  P3  P3 CD  I-’-  0  H0  it  0 CD H-  ‘ZI  ci  3 CD  0  it  CD CD  C)  CD  P3 H CD 0  P3 Cl)  H CD ci  I—’ I—’  CD  C)  0 3  H-  H-  H  CD  CD  ci  ci  H-  C)  CD H)  II  0 H  ci) it ti  Q ci CD 3 it  C)  CD ci  ci0  H0  it  H-  P3 1  ci CD  H)  ‘<  ciCD Ci  ci P3  ‘Q  H-  CD  CD  H ci  H  P3  CD  p3 it  CD  CD  ‘ti  ci  CD  ci-  0 H)  CD  CD  ci  C) P3  b CD  -  ci CD CD  H  •  H-  H)  HH) CD  H  H-  it 0  ci-’  0 I  Hi-f) CD  H  H)  H-  ci  CD  CD  X 0  •  CD  P3 ‘Q  H-  H  )  H-  C) ci H-  HC)  b H  ci  ci  CD  0 H)  ci CD  cici  cii  CD  H  it  3  p3  3  H-  0  Ci  P3  CD  C) P3  CD  b’  HC)  H  Y’ 0  it  3  C)  P3  ci) CD  ci CD  H  it P3 ci-  CD  CD  Q  H-  C)  0 I—’ H-  P3 it  C)  I  ciH-  P3  Q  3  0  CD  C) H  Ij  0 I  ‘ti I-  Cl) I-I  iQ  II  cii  CD  CD ci  -  0  H-  ci-  C)  ci  Q.  II 0  ‘z3  CD  H-  it  Hi  0  ci-  P3 ci  CD  P3  0  ciH-  ciP3  CD  CD  ‘d ci CD  ci CD  CD  -  ci  HCD  H H  CD  a  CD  •  CD  3  J  H-  b  b  C)  H-  F-’  0  it  cii  C)  I  H  ci-  P3 3  H  P3  :3 ci  ciH-  C) 0  P3  ‘-<  CD  ci-  it 0  3  0  CD CD H-  C) C) CD  CD ci  0  H) ci  CD  ‘S  ci  HC)  CD ci  CD  ci-  H) 0 ci  :3 ‘-Q  F-’  ‘Q ci  1  P3  H  ci  ci  H0  CD  CD  H  ci-  I-b  0  ‘1 <  CD 0 H  P3 iQ  ci-  H  p3  CD  l-  ci ci  CD lP3  ci  H H  C) p3  CD  ci-  H)  0  j  F-’0  CD  ci  C) H  :D:  CD  CD ci H N  ci-  lP3 C)  P3  C)  P3 CD  0 tS CD  ci  ::y  ci-  14  texts through references to her livelihood, nor that her visual image would be referred to in descriptive texts as that representing the  ‘popish midwife’.  What this  conventional form of popular representation provided, then, was an established means through which Cellier’s midwifery profession became associated with her alleged criminality.  I therefore intend to analyze how this  association of Cellier’s  ‘popish’  crimes with her  midwifery practice was constructed.  My analysis of the  popular representation of Cellier in The Popish Damnable (Figs.  Plot 3),  1 and 2),  The Solemn Mock Procession...  and The Happy Instruments...  (Fig. 5)  (Fig.  will establish  how the different religious, political and medical discourses on popery and midwifery came together in the image of the  ‘popish midwife’ to depict midwifery as a  criminal practice and thus operate as an implicit attack on the profession of midwifery itself. The Popish Damnable Plot, broadside engraving  (Fig.  (13 1/4 x 19 in),  1)  is a large  the upper portion  of which is composed of twelve numbered images; originally a text appeared directly below the image 2) .0  (Fig.  This engraving claimed to document particular  crimes committed by Catholics against various officials 10 BM 1088, December 20, 1680. M.D. George, Catalogue of Prints and Drawings in the British Museum, Political and Personal Satires (London: Chiswick Press, 1870) 641; David Kunzle, in his The Early Comic Strip (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973) states that the top portion of the print is now located at the British Museum and the lower at the British Museum Library, Luttrell Collection, iii, 142 (press— mark: C 20f).  15  of the local London government.  Cellier’s participation  in the Meal Tub Plot is depicted in the sequence of images numbered V-VIII.  Similar in format but larger is  The Solemn Mock Procession...  (19—20 in),  a broadside  containing an image in the upper portion of the print with a commentary below  (Fig.  This broadside  3)  represents a particular event in London, procession of November 17th,  1680.  the pope—burning  Cellier is  represented on the first pageant float of the parade. These processions were put on by local Whig and nonconformist elites in an attempt to rally support for 2 exclusion.’ print  The Happy Instruments...,  (10 1/2 x 13 7/8 in),  is a smaller  composed largely of an image  with a small explanatory text at the bottom of the page reminiscent of the broadside format  (Fig.  The  engraving is a fabricated and mocking representation of a ‘popish plot’ to reinstate Catholicism in England. Cellier is shown in the lower left of the image as an accomplice, both to the plot and the pope’s attempts to recover England from Protestantism. In my analysis I will discuss how these images used particular contemporary conventions of visual political  BM 1085, November,  1680. George, Political and Personal Satires 632.  12 Peter Burke, ‘Topular Culture in seventeenth century London,” Popular Culture in seventeenth century England ad. Barry Reay (London: St. Martin’s Press, 1985) 31—58. 13 BM 1114,  George, Personal and Political Satires 682.  I-.  •  I  ‘DI  CD  CI-  I-’-OO ZOO ‘0 ‘0 CD  Ct l-ICCD  CD0 0 0  0’—’ —‘I-lCD opICuE t-rH•(0 0(0 II CDW-’ ‘(1-0 —3 ‘I CD ‘—‘I--’  E  0-H(CC rtCD HD< OWCD 0 00  lIMO  H C) p1(00  I-’- CD CD CD 0 00’  pr  —‘0  ,Cl CD 00 rr 0fl 0 D)0 CtCD 1 H CD0.  ‘—‘.0  IIWPI 0CDFl-1(DW 0 P’CD  OWO E’•CD  CtCl CDC-’lIME l—’CDCD  WW-’CDCD  C-’-  0—F  ci ‘-<  Ct 0  •  CD 0 0CD  CO  ci •  01  H  01  $2  CI H-  Ct  .0 11 0  p3  Ct hi H-  CO  P3 Ct  CD 0 0-  CD  Ct (Ii  H  •  CO  H‘.0  ‘i  Ct  P3  CD  CO  CD  Ct  Ct CD  hi  0 0  Cl)  H-  < CD  I-I  CD  CO  CO CD  CD  CD  hi  —. CO  ci  P3 H  CD  CD hi  Ct  H-  ci  CD  rt-  ‘< CO  p3  I—’  P3  HCO  CD  CO  Ct  p3  Ct  Ct  H) P3 C)  CD  Ct  tY’ ‘-<  -<  H  0  CO CD C)  ci  C3  ——  H-  CD  ICD CO CD  ct  II  (D ‘-CI  ‘-CI  CD  Ct  H-  H  $2”  CD  CD H  H H-  hi  H) 0  H-  CD  Ct  CD  ct  ci  CD Cl)  ‘CI  CD  i-c  ci  Ct CD  II CD CO CD  CD ‘-CI  HH) HCD  Cl) HQ  Cl)  <  P3  H  0  C)  CD $2  Ct  C)  H-  ‘-CI  ci  CD  Cl’  0  Ct H CD  Q (D  P3  H)  0  CD  ‘,Q  P3  H-  H 0  0  ‘DI  C-IC  0  Cl  Ct  (0  C—’ —3  0  Ct  CD  II  .C  I-’O lJCD  C-’  toP’  (lC)  ‘  CD 1—’’--’  WF0  Wc  CDC-’  .00 0C—  .0  0.W 0  00 0WH  W0fl 0P’CD  a’—  0  0H  () —‘I:’j P’O Cl  CD 00Co <CD  zO_0  00 I—CDCD OEOP’  0.0 •0 CD  00  Octr  -0 W0(D CD0 0  o.g.  -  t-1,G) OCD  C)’  F-I--IO  CDCDO  H-  H)  Ct  $2  HCD  Ct CO  CD  p..  H-  CD  t3  P3  C)  Ct  ci  tY  —  HC)  tY H  ci  ‘-j  Hi  p..  hi CD  H5  P3  Cl) ‘.0  ‘.0  0 Ct Ct H-  H  —  ‘-CI  S CO  Ct H0  C)  P3  II  CD  ‘-<  ty’  I-’ ‘-< CD P3  ‘-CI ‘-CI  CO  Ct  p3  0  CD  0  Ct i-’ CD  CD  ‘  I-  H-  J  •.  ‘< Cl)  P3  0  Ct  H-  0 II  H)  Ct 0  ii CO  C)  CD  Ct  P3 CO  P3 CO  -.  ci  ‘1  CD hi CD  0  C)  ci  D CD P3  II  CD  3  HCt  i  0  CO  I-I  H  CO  H-  CD  — CO  P3  0  Ct  CD  CD  CO  I-I  CD  iH-  CD H  C)  H-  i  CD  CO  hi CD  D  H  CD  çt  0 H)  Ct H0  i H-  0 ‘.0  C)  CD  I-i  H)  0  CO  P3  CD  P3  P3 CO  CD  <  I-  CO CD  ci  f—-’  0  CD  ‘-  H-  H)  CD F-’  CD -i CD  CD ‘-<  Ct  C)  CD  ‘-CI  D  H-  0 hi  I-h  Cli C) Ct  CD  Ct  0 H)  D  Cli  P3 I—’  ci H< H-  H-  i—i  Cl) CO  ‘.Q  p3  H-  CD  Ct  0 H)  J  P3 C)  CD  •  0  S  H  Ct  CD  ‘-0  P3  0 H)  CO CO  CD  0.-  P3 I-I p.-  ti Q  CO ct P3  CD  ct  H-  P3 II CO  CD  P-)  ‘-CI ‘-CI  CD  Ct  3  HCt  $2  Ct CD  CD  CO  hi  (I)  ‘CI  hi  CD  —  Ct  C)  CD  ‘-i-  0  C)  CD C) HH) H-  ‘CI  CO  P3  -‘  co  P3 CO CD  C)  CD  0  CO  I-I  •  <  HCt  H-  P3 C) Ct  hi  P3  H  ci  C)  Ct H-  II  P3  ‘CI  P3  HI  ‘-P  H-  ‘s  P3  ct  P3 I-I  ‘-CI  CD  ct  ci  Ct CD  II CD CO CD  ‘-CI  M  CD  H-  hi  0 hi  —  H0  CD Cs) CO  0 H)  ‘-CI  hi  CD H-  J  Ct  ‘.0  P3  Ct H  hi  CD H-  Ct  P3 CO  Cl)  ‘.0  H-  Ct  C)  CO ci  ‘.  ‘-I  0 ci  Ct  H  c  Ø  H-  <  H-  ci  H-  j  0  i  CD  Ct H ‘-<  (1)  pi  Ø  CD  i-c  HCD  H)  Ct H-  CD  H)  -  CO Cs)  CD  <  CD  Ct Hi—c  CO P3  HCt HC) P3 H  H  0  ‘-CI  ci P3 I-’  <  HCO  H HCO  ‘-P  Li  II ‘-<  Ct  CD  C)  Ct  CD  Ct CD  CD  CD  CO  HP3 Ct i hi CD  C)  hi  P3  C)  0 H)  0 hi  H)  CD  Ct  i  H-  ci Ct CD Cs)  H-  l-  ct  ct  P3  H  C) P3  ‘-< CO H-  I—c  H P3  C)  P3 hi Ct H-  ‘-CI  ‘.  P3 CO HN H-  ‘-CI  CD  ‘-<  CI  P3 H  i  H-  <  H-  ci  H-  j  Cl-’  HN CD  C)  Hct H-  I-I  C)  Ct  HtQ  II  Cl)  CD  ‘-CI  P3  ‘-CI  CO  CD  H-  1 CD  P3  Ct H-  CO  P3 H  C)  H-  Ct  0 H H-  ‘-CI  H  Cli  CD P3 CO  hi  CD  .  HH) CD  p..  H-  Ct  P3  H-  CD  p..  P3  CO  Cli  hi  CD  Ct  0  CD  Ct  0  -  -  HCO  ‘-CI  0  ‘-CI  -  P3  P3 U)  p..  P3  CD  0  CD  Ct  0  H H H CD hi  C) CD  Ct  CO CD  II  CD  (l)  Q  Ct  CD  CO pC IH-ct HH-  C)  P3 H H-sCl) Cli  <  -  P3 ‘-<  0  Ct  I-.  cC  z  CD  Cr,  0  CO (C  CD  I-’  01 H  C)  oZ  CD  1• (DO CO  CD  zp  ‘lID  C- Cr,  (Oct  liz  Ol) itI1  ,-•  ‘lCD (OX (1 C-t.(O  CD’ lCD  CD  CD1  CD$2  CD I1  H-  (31  p.  (C  CD  -  it  C) (C) Co CD  ‘  Cl) (C C)  HI  •  —  ‘  0 H)  Co  (C ti CD  CD I-  it  Cl) ‘-< 1:1 0 ‘TI Co F-’-  H-  CD H H  C)  ‘Q  H-  C  I-  0  ‘  Cl)  (C)  (C Cl)  C) It Cl)  II Cl) Co Cl)  (Ci  (3)  ICD  Ii HS it Co  ‘(3  it J’ CD  0 Hi  ‘(3  HC)  it Hit H CD  (C)  ‘<  (3’  (C’ it  11  H 0  ‘-P CD I it CD N it  (C)  iiHit H CD I H-  Cs) HC)  (Cl  t3’  (C  0 Hi  p.  ‘(3 0 Co CD  0  C)  CD  I-  CD  Ii  ‘1 CD CD  Ci C) CD  (P H H H-  CT)  it  H H  p.  it Ii 0  -  H  .  hJ Hp Co  CD  C’) CD  -.  Q  II CC) < H-  CD 3  CD  J  it  ‘.Q  Ii CD Co CD 3 it H-  ‘(3  Ii CD  CD  Cl)  0  it  -.  Co HCo  H-  Ii  C)  N C) H Ci Co I--’0  Li  CD  it  ,.Q  F-’-  II  p.  p.  Ci C) CD  0 p.  I-  H-  p.  W0Q  H-H(D  iiCo  Ii H-  ‘TI  CD CD it  ‘  ‘  0 ‘Q CD Ii  CO  0 H)  F-’it F-’0  Hi H-  it 0  CD p.  0  itCDit CD (C-’ (CCOH-o ‘C) Co CDOit ‘< C<liH Coito(C, CoC) •Cii HPJCDO (CitCi a-itCOit titiH CD(C, H-Il (C)itCD itI Oft (PP.’ it Co  CD  p.  ‘iCDitCD  CD  J’. (P13  C) it H-  D’  CD  I-C  H) Ci  it (C) it H0 tI Co  CD  co  Ii CD  ‘-P  (C-’ Co Co CD CO Co H-  it 0  CD Ii  H 0 Co  C)  CD  C) 0  C) (C)  CD  -.  CD Ii ‘<  CD  ‘(3  H)  H-  Hp.  0  Ii C’) CD  C) 0 Ci  (J  H-  )  fr  it  HHi H) CD II CD  Co •  it  (C) 13’ 0 Ci it  Ci Cs)  (/7  CD  Co  C) 0 5  p.  (C’ i  ‘.Q  H-  CD (C)  CD  ti  CD (C p.  p.  (C)  (J)  CD II  <  HCD  CD HI-  it  0  CC)  CD  it CD’itti Y’CtIC)H• CDH-tiCDC)It.  Co  H-  (Ci  H  C)  CD Co  it  it  Ci C)  CD ti  CD ii ‘<  it ii  H H)  it H-  r 0  O1p(PçliH-  •  -t-(C). CDO0(P (0(Pt—’. CoDs Hp. HCDHCoH-CD j ‘)3Cfl bj-, p.Q 1C) -itO1I3CDH CD C)HiO(P(PQ Hitoit tiCoCi COO <citi ‘(5(i) CD CD C) H-CoH)C)Hi’13CT) D’it I-1000Co CD H-OCi,) tiOCDH itCo. (Dti CDO. • H-CI 3H-itCD ctCD j’(D Li  ‘3  CDF-’(DC) ND<CDit  1—o1(CDp.i-tp.  Hti •p.pct (C)f—’(C) HQi-1<(C)H-h(3H-  itti H-CD & •CDQo  CD  Co  I—’  ‘.Q  CO H-  p.  (C)  CD Cs)  I--s 0 (C p. Co F-’-  CD  it tY’  0 Hi  ‘<  (C) i  CD  bp’-Ci CDtiCiCD, o p.r1p. CD(Dc  C) 0 Co  F-’-  p.  Ii  (t)  D  C)  p.  •  it  it CD  C) 0  CD HI-C  ‘  it  0 H-,  tQ Co  H-  p.  (C-’  CD ICo it  Ci i  -  CT) Co  C)  HCD  Ci  H CD  (3’  I-I i (C-’ p. p. CD CD CD p. H-’ Co F-’(3’  it Cs)  H-  ‘(3  0 Hi  ‘-P CD i Ii CD C,)  it  HH) H) CD 1 CD  p.  CD  it  0  y  L.Q  N H-  1<  H  p,  CD  ‘  it  (C.’ it CD p.  it  p. HC)  <  CD  (C)  ‘  (C ‘<  Co  H-, 0 ii  Ci C)  13 0  Q  H-  CD Cs) Co  Co  C/)  -  0  it  CD  <  H-  ‘  I-’it  C) CD F-’ I-’ HCD Ii  LQ  it H-  CD ‘TI II CD Cl) CD  (I)  it  ‘(3 Ii H-  CD Cl) CD  it  0 I—h  Cl)  CD  p.  (C  co  CD i C) CD  HHi H) CD  Cl  it D’ CD  ‘  (I)  H H-  (3’  CD Cs) it (C)  :  HH I-’  H  •  C) H Ci Cs) H0  N  H-  CD  H-  C,)  -  CD  t;i Ci  it  Ii  HH P-  H-  CD  it  H) 0 t—  ‘Q  H-  Ci  iP  fr  (C)  0 H-,  ‘(3 0 Cs) CD Cs)  Ci  ‘  CD  ti  it  I  o  H-,  CD  co  I iiCC) it H0  CD  I-I CD (0  ‘(3  ii CD -  it CD p.  I-I H-  ‘TI  I—h  0  Cs)  Hi 0 1  (C) H-  CD  it  H-,  Q  CD  o  CD Ii CD  it Ct)  0  H  ‘3  ‘tS 0 ‘(3 HCo  Ii  it t-’  Co CD  CT)  CT) ‘13  it CD N it  p.  (C  CD  (C)  H  o  it  y  0 H-,  p.  0 Cl) CD  0  0  it Cl)  ii H-  CD  it  Iz’ CD  Co  I-’ CD  ‘-P  Co H  p.  (Ci  Hp. CD C,)  Cl)  Il 0 (C) p.  (3’  p.  0  II H  ‘ci CD  Cl)  H-  it  ‘-P  H  Ci  1  —1  I-’  18  image is located below the title and above the description or  ‘explanation’,  which dictates to the  viewer the intended meaning of the print.  I shall  consider how this format of representation operated not only to depict Cellier as a  ‘popish’  criminal and  midwife, but how these conventions were used to bring together these two aspects of her public image as a tacit criticism of the midwifery practice she represented. In order to understand how these representations could have been interpreted by London viewers,  I will  first establish the precise context in which they were produced.  The two questions I will ask in this first  chapter are:  Firstly,  what were the political  motivations behind the prolonged representation of Cellier as a  ‘criminal’ midwife?  And secondly,  what were  the conditions in London during this period for the production and distribution of printed political imagery, such as that representing Cellier?  A detailed analysis  of the images themselves will follow in the next two chapters. The Restoration of the English monarchy in 1662 included the re-instatement of the Licensing Act,  and  with it the imposition of a rigorous censorship on English printing.  This Act stated that all press  publications were to be licensed by either the Secretary of State,  the Archbishop of Cantebury,  the Bishop of  19  7 or the Vice-Chancellor of Oxford or Cambridge.’  London,  Thus it was that the London Gazette, which represented a generally pro-royalist and pro-Church of England point of view,  was the only licensed newspaper in London during  the 1660s and 1670s.  Consequently, political information  which questioned the authority of both the Anglican Church and government could only be printed in nonlicensed texts  (the publication of which was sporadic),  or circulated in hand—written newsletters or 18 manuscripts.  However,  in 1679,  when Charles II  prorogued parliament because of its insistence on a number of occasions to re—introduce the Exclusion Bill, this restrictive Licensing Act was temporarily lifted. The King dissolved Parliament at the very moment when the Licensing Act was due for renewal by the House of Commons,  and thus Parliament could not renew the Act  until 1681. As a result,  the lifting of censorship coincided  with the highly emotive and complex political situation brought about by the Exclusion Crisis.  By 1679,  nonconformists and Whigs in London had grown increasingly uneasy over the issue of exclusion because of the gradual increase of Anglican Court party members in the London 17 Christopher Hill, Company, 1980) 213 18 Harris,  100.  The Century of Revolution,  1603—1714  (New York:  W.W. Norton and  20  city government in the late 1670s.  Many of those  affiliated with the Court Party supported the Duke of York as legitimate heir to the throne,  and their presence  in local government was seen as an attempt to retrieve local control from dissenters.  Nonconformist fears were  not restricted to the Anglican Court Party.  Charles II’s  dissolution of Parliament had been supported not only by Court Party supporters, but by members of the High Church.  The issue of exclusion for nonconformists,  therefore,  had both a religious and political focus.  Gary De Krey has stated,  As  exclusion was considered  essential for nonconformist local government “because it would preserve intact the civil supremacy over the church.. . The popery of the anglican prelacy.  .  .had to be  9 3 guarded against as much as that of Rome”. With the lifting of censorship,  these conflicts  could suddenly be articulated in the London press.  Many  of the local London printers during this period were nonconformists,  and those who favoured Exclusion took  full advantage of the relative freedom of the press (unlike their Court Party adversaries who printed relatively little)  in order to disseminate their  ° 2 political opinions to larger audiences.  Generally  Gary S. De Krey, “London Radicals and Revolutionary Politics,” The Politics of Religion in Restoration England, eds. Tim Harris, Paul Seaward and Mark Goldie (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1990) 89. 20 Harris,  97.  21  speaking,  Whig street printing documented two related  events during this period.  The first was the political  problem of Exclusion and the second was the  ‘popish plot’  of 1679 and subsequent plots of 1680. The first so-called ‘popish plot’ the Exclusion Crisis was in 1678,  to occur during  when Titus Oates,  an  adventurer who had converted from Catholicism to Anglicanism,  confessed to Sir Edmund Bury Godfrey,  Justice of the Peace in London,  that he knew of a  plot’ to kill the King and take over England.  a Whig ‘popish  Godfrey  was found brutally murdered several days after this confession,  and newspapers claimed that his timely death  was part of the plot as had been recounted by Oates  (for  an example of this event’s representation in the press see The Murder of Sir Edmund Bury Godfrey, Fig.  6).  This  event fuelled local anxieties about exclusion and for ’ 2 several months panic is said to have raged in London. Producers of nonconformist street literature could exploit fears of the  ‘popish plot’  and the Meal Tub Plot  in an attempt to convince audiences of the need to exclude a Roman Catholic from the throne.  Certainly,  this would explain why Cellier was continually referred 21 Families living in London armed themselves, while two thousand men of the trained bands patrolled the city every night. Particular streets in the city were roped off in order to control the movement of people while daggers bearing Godfrey’s name were sold and carried by those worried of attacks by ‘papists’. Fear of the Catholic attack was also felt at the governmental level: Before Parliament was dissolved in 1679, it passed a law banning Catholics from sitting in either House. See John Miller, Popery and Politics in England 1660—1688 (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1973) 161.  Cl)  0-  “C  I  1<  ic  I  Irt  I’  0  i  lCD  10  -H  H’  oo  CD1  oc  ‘-  ,-c,  fl  oo••  Z 0-0  —  13 HC) 13  H  H) CD P3  P3  P3 H  CD  H)  Cl  P3 13  Cl HC)  i_i-  ,,  i-  HCo  C)  0 H H-  ‘-C)  Cl  •  t\)  ‘)  C) 0 Cl  ‘-<  t5  H-  13 CD  3  CD Co  P3 ft CD Cl  H  CD  Cl  P3 Co  -  ‘TI  H-  13  CO  0 H  H)  0  Co  3  0  ‘Ti 13 P3 Co HCo  13  CD  Co  ft  H-  0 H)  CD  Co  P3  CD C)  b  13  HC)  13  CD  0 H)  ‘Ti CD H < CD H Co H0 13  Co  0 Ci  13  CD  13  tJ’ H P3 CO  Cl  13  P3  ft P3 H  0  ft  P3  ‘•  13 Q  H-  ft  C)  H-  13  t CD CD C)  CO  -  Cl) ct  H H-  C)  C)  ft  1  P3 C)  ‘-d  ft 0 H HC)  d 0 Co  CD  C!)  Cl)  CD H HCo çt HC)  ft  ‘1 H-  H-  P3  Cl  II  0  0 ft  P3 13 Cl  13  p3  b  CD Cl  H(0  <  CD  Cl  HLQ H0 13  I C) P3 ft  -  (D H  ft H-  t-  H)  CD  P3 CO  ft  tT  0 H)  Ift  113  13 ICC!  P3 Co CD  ‘Cl lCD lt’  CD  13  ft  CO CO CD 13 ft HCD H H ‘<  ‘  (0 3’ H‘t3  II  0  H)  0  II  0  13  13 P3 ft H< CD  H  P3 H ft CD  13  CD  3 CO  ft  13  0  13  HCO  C)  H H-  0  ft  p3  C)  H Cl  P3  CD  CQ  H  rt 0  CD  L.Q  p)  Cl’ IH ‘<  CD  P3 3  CD  13  H) II 0  Cl  CD  ft  CD  Ci C)  Cl  0  H Co  3  CD H CD  ft Co  ft P3 13  H 0 ft CD Co  ‘-  13  H HCo  L1 13  —  Cl  13 ft CD  II CD (0 CD  ICD  CD  ft  ‘<P3  OH-  <1  ftH-ft  •  •  •  Ci OCO 13CC!  P3 ft 13 0 H HC) HCo  O 13HC)  HCOH  13H-Ci”  tY’ ‘-3H0Co  Cl  ClP3  CD 13 ftt3’HftCDCiCo H13H1 —ftHL-  CoCo5  ClftH  13OJCD  P3H  COH(DCI) HtIH  ft1313 iC) I:’13 p3CDft” H-13’  Cl  CD’  (D’-<PJ  13  ft  P313 H-H13CD NCDCl  C)  HCD  C0’<Cl) -ft CoClCD  0  ftH-H13  CO C013C)H-  H-  Q1313’(O P)ClCDCO  C)  13 P3 ft  ft  ft  H CD Cli  13  ft  H  P3  C)  H-  H Hft  ‘Ti 0  13’  ft  ft 0  13  ft H0  H-  Cl  Cl  P3  I-I 13  •  13  0  H-  ft  13  P3  13  H HCO  13  Ii  CD  t 13  H  CD  ,.Q  C) 0  ‘<  H  Cl  0 Co CD  ‘TI  Ci ‘Ti  Co  0  ft  H Co  Co  ft CD 13 ft H0  13  H-  CD  ft 13  CO  CD  Y’  H-  H  H-  13 P3  Cl  .‘  ‘—  (TI  •  J  HCC)  —  •  •  •  CD 13 ct Co  113’ lCD  1’-3  H13  Co CD  H  CD  <  13 ‘-C)  H-  0  H H  0  H)  13  CD  ft  CD CD Cl  Cl  13  I-I  •  HCD ft ‘<  C)  13’  I-I 13 CO ft H CO 0  H HCo  1<  CD CO C)  13  L’I ‘Q  ‘i3  )  H-  C) H  -  CO 13’  0 ‘TI H-  -  II  13  CD  0 ct  Cl  P3 3  I-  CD  (1) H H H-  C)  H)  0  II  0 H)  H H  P3  ft  C)  H) CD  H)  CD  ft 0  H  13 ft HP3  CD  ft  0  ft 13 CD  Hft 13  13 13 ‘<  P3  ft ‘< H  CO  0  H-  ‘Q  (D H H-  CO  P3  CD H H  Co  CD  H  C) CD  H-  Hft  H  0  ‘TI  P3  13  ft  0  Cl  ft CD  13 CO ct Hft  C) 0  H HC) HCO  13’ C)  CD ft  C)  H-  ft  p3  ft 13  H H0 Cl  CD  Co  13  ft  ‘-C)  Ii  I-I H-  Cl  CO CO  H CD  ‘-d  13’ HCC)  13 CD  ft  H13  Cl) 1 l  H  H) 0  ‘TI Ci ft  0 ft H0 13  ft 13 CD  0 H)  CD  ft P3 ft H-  CD CO CD 13  ‘-d H  H CD  P3 (0  C).  13  p3  .Q H  LI 13  H)  0  ‘.Q  b (D H-  ‘—3  I  CD H H  ft 13 CD  ft 0  ft  3  ft 13 H CD  P3  Co  P3  H H HCD H  CD  C)  H)  0  13  0  ft CD H HN P3 ft H-  C)  CD IP3  C)  Co  H-  •  F’.)  •  H‘-C)  CD CD  . Co  ‘<  ft  C) H Ci CD H  Cl) H CD  Co  HCD  C)  CD II  Co CD  13 0  1<  H  P3  CD ICO  <  J”  H  IHICo  Ic) frd  I  13 lCD  h-3  0 H)  H3  P3 <  H  :3 .Q  CD  (D  J  ft  13’  HCO  ‘TI 0  p3  Cl  P3  -  13 CO  0  CO  H H HCD H  C) CD  13  ‘TI H CD  N P3  CD  i-  0  H)  ft  -113 I. I. ‘ I. I’Ti P3 IH N Ic  CD  0  13 CD  0 H-,  3 CD  0  Cl  H CD  C) P3  HCo  13  13  13  H) 0 H  ‘<  3 h  CD 13 ft  13  0  C)  H  P3  Ci  N ft  CD  ft  CD  ft  H  CO  ft CD H  C)  0 H H  ft 13  H I C)  13  ft  p3  H Ii  ft 0  t\)  23  “was to be found in every  according to J.R. Jones,  section and class of English society”)  was fuelled in the  press by the continual reference to alleged horrors of ‘Bloody’ Mary’s reign,  the Armada of 1588,  Gunpowder plot of 1605.23  This  ‘history’  and the could be used  to demonstrate that the threat of Catholicism,  and the  religious and political tyranny that it had come to represent was a foreign menace,  whose success within  England could be facilitated only by local English sympathizers to the Catholic cause.  Indeed,  largely because of the perception that extreme local danger,  that fear of  it is  ‘popery’ was an  ‘popish’  crimes  against the nation could be exploited in the accusation of a particular person or group for religious or political sedition. 24 Probably the largest institution to face such accusations during the reign of Charles II was the Church of England.  Increasingly during this period,  dissenters  criticized the Church of England in anti-Catholic terms. This was not because Anglicanism was necessarily a threat to the whole nation  (although nonconformist rhetoric  characterized it as such);  23 J.R. Jones, Revolution of 1688,  rather Anglicanism was thought  (London:  Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1972)  75.  24 During the Civil War, the anti—Catholic tradition had been taken up by Puritans who attacked the Church of England as ‘popish for its pseudo—Catholic emphasis on religious ritual. While Anglicans, because of the threat to institutional religious stability that dissent represented, had also returned the insult, condemning Puritans as ‘popish’.  24  to be a more specific threat to the political life London especially) dissenters.  (in  and religious freedom of English  As Tim Harris states,  “Nonconformist  criticisms of the Church of England were thus typically expressed in the rhetoric of anti-Catholicism. ceremonies. 25 popery’”.  .  elites  .Anglican  .could be condemned with the cry of Indeed,  ‘no  while the Exclusion Crisis had first  arisen from fears of a Catholic monarch, ‘popish’  .  anxiety over  tyranny was exploited by Whig nonconformist  (politicians and printers)  in order to criticize  the institution of the Church of England at home. In other words, plots’  the Whig rhetoric about the  ‘popish  in the London press during the Exclusion campaign,  while overtly anti-Catholic,  also contained an implicit  criticism of the local political activities of the Church of England.  Furthermore,  as Harris states:  “a clear  bias towards a nonconformist audience can be found in Whig propaganda” which was used to criticize the Anglican 26 establishment.  Thus the construction of Cellier in the  nonconformist press may have been an effective form of critique of the established church.  Midwives licensed by  the Church of England played an important role in ecclesiastical and civil courts as witnesses in illegitimacy cases, 25 Harris,  73.  26 Harris,  97.  and because of this could be  c.J  N)  —C  0C  CD  0  0  Cl  H)  rf  CD  CD C)  CD  CD  CD  CD  II  C) CD  CD  N)  ‘-<Cia  H- it HiCOO C)) H H  O  CD  H-COCD it H‘-Ii Ci0 H-Il CO  C)IlC))  F-.CD’d t) 1< P)CD<  OM COO CDQ)CDO CDctCDO.tS COCDIlM•it •CD CO rtY< OMCDH-CD CnCDCOctit ctP)Q. HctH-t-3CDb HH-H-H H-CO0CDCD CDM CD CDCOIl ‘<  CDb  •IlJ HP) £‘JCD3t5 •—] QCOitCD< Cit C) CO DCD OHH-C)CD COC))COCiOCD  C5CHP)L0 (D0CD CDIl HCOO  D-ç)octo Ci F-H-CDrtCD0 C10. QCO 0.iP) P) OHH-0. Ilit HIlHCD CO C) j(DP  •.  CD C) CD CO CO C)) Ij <  C)) CO  it CO  CD  H  ‘d  CD  Ct)  <  CO H-  CD  d  N  CD  <J’d’-Q  OIlCD  H-  H-  H-C)itFCD0OHit )—‘itH(-tit 0IlHCDCO  CO  3 CD  it CD $2  II H-  ‘tj  Hi  0  C)) it H0  H-  CO CD  HCO  0.  CD  it  C)) it  it  CD 0.  CO it C)) it  HW CO  t  C)  H H-  0  C) P’ it  i it HI  C))  C))  Hit  CD CD it  J  CO  CO  CD  CD  -  CD  0  Hi II 0  Ci CD it  ,Q  C))  H ‘<  CD CD  CD  ‘-3  0 Hi  it CD II  Il H-  ‘rj  C)) i Cl  it CD II  HCO CO CD  0.  C))  CD  II  CD  C)  <  CD 3 II  •  CO Cl)  C))  C)  -  J HLQ  -  CD  it  it 0  Hit C)) H  CO HCl CD II CD Cl  0  C)  C)) CO  it CO  CD  CD  CD  CD CO  it  H)  0  it CO  i  0 Ci  C)  C)) C)  1  p,  H CD it CO  ‘Z5  ‘ti C))  FC5 0 H Hit HC) CD H  it CD  Ci  H-  b  Il  HCO it  0.  0.  C))  it  II H-  0  it  CO  CD  ‘Q  it H-  ‘Q  0 Hi  CO CD H-  J H-  o  C)) C)  ‘Q  CD H-  CD CO  I I  C)  0 H H-  it  C) CD  P)  0  CD  it  II  0  C)  II  -  •  HCD CO  C)  CD  Cl)  it  -  H H-  ‘Q  Ci  -  ‘ti H 0 it CO  CO  0 ‘ti H-  -  it 1J CD  CD i  C) H Ci CO H0  N  ij  II Hi  C1  HCo  0  -  ‘ti  CO it I-’ CD Cl) it  0 Hi  CO  0 ii  Hi  it  CD  Il  H) CD  H)  H-  Q,  C)) i ‘<  0.  Ci CO CD  CO  CD Il  tY HH Hct <  rt  II H-  ‘d  C))  CD  it  II  CD  I it  I  II C)  Ci  N  CD CO  CD Cl  C) it CD II H-  D  C)  CD Cl  C) J C)) II  iQ  H-  CD  CD  CD  it CO  CD  CO it  CD  II 0 it  0 [-b  CO  II 0  HC) ::3  J  H HCO  b  it C))  CD CO  J  HC)  C))  H 0 it  C))  b  5 CD  CD  I-I CD C)) it  it  0  it  C)) CO  CO  Ci 0 Ci  H-  tY’  CD  Hit  it  H CD Hi  it C)) it H0  CD  CD CO  ‘I  ‘d  II CD  Ci C)  •  0  CD H HiQ H-  I-I  0  CO it  CD Q CD H-  H 0 it  ‘CI  p  0 Hi  CO  CD C))  CO  H  •  HLQ  hj  —  0  ct  H  • • •  HCO  0 d  CD  ‘-  HI-’ CD  CO  ‘-< it CD II H-  Il CD CO  CD  it  0 i  ‘zj  Ci  it  0  H  CD  it  Ii  c  it  CD  0  it  CD  it  ct  H  II  H CO  J H C)  0  CD II  ‘tj C))  0 Hi  it  CD  CO  C))  Hi  0 H  0  o  HCO  Fl  CD  CD H H H-  C)  -  01 —  •  LQ  H-  Ixj  -  • •  •  it CO  CD  Ci  CO it II  H  CD  CD  H-  II  CD  H H H-  C) CD  Hi  0  it p it H0  CD CO CD  II  CD ‘t3  II  CD  it  H-  -  H CD  N C))  CD  0 I-  IxJ  •  it  I-  CD  0  Fl  CD < CD  C)) CO  ii CD CO CO  H CO it  Hi 0 II  i  C) 0  0  CD  it  H-  II C)  Ci  C)  C))  H HC)  i.  CD  it  Q Hi  CO  C) II Hit HC) F-’-  C)  CO  CD II  <1  CD  0  •  H  C  C) C i it ‘1  CO 0 C) HCD H  Fl  C)  Ci  C)  Hi  0  it  C)) 0 CD  H-  CD  C)) it  CD  it D II  CD  CD CO  II C)  Ci  C)  CD  it  C Hi  it CO HCl CD  Ci  0  CD  0 CO  it  <  < CD  C) CD H-  CD l  F  t\) 01  26  Statements such as this attested to the importance of inexpensive and widely distributed street literature for the Whig cause.  Indeed one Court Party writer is  reported to have complained of the effect of excessive Whig literature on the people of London: that had made  “‘Tis the Press  ‘urn Mad...  Polemical political images were not produced on a regular basis at this time,  and occurred--it has been  argued by M.D. George-—largely as a result of “civil strife,  war,  or near rebellion.” 29  Certainly, the  presence of various different kinds of imagery during the years of the exclusion and ‘popish plots’,  then, would  have signalled the fact that London was in a state of unusual political crisis. prints,  Broadsides,  single sheet  and playing cards--all of which were modes used  to represent Cellier——were some of the most frequently printed forms of imagery for political purposes during this period. 30  28 Sir Roger L’Estrange Observator in Question and Anwser 1,  1680.  29 George, English Political Caricature, 17. 30 In addition to various kinds of political imagery, a large number of texts were produced in the format of news sheet weeklies such as the Domestick Intelligence, a single news sheet printed by the dissenter Benjamin Harris which documented news of “both City and Country” from a staunchly Whig point of view. Pamphlets were also printed and could be anywhere from two to fifty pages in length. The pamphlet format was usually used to discuss a particular issue, personality, or event in more depth than the news sheet format allowed. Such pamphlets had a wide readership, for not only were they inexpensive printed political information (indeed, they were some of the cheapest goods for sale at London markets), but locals spoke of how pamphlets were read and passed through so many hands that they would begin to disintegrate.  p  I  F-  II  -CD  i H-W  o  0 11h  --  00  Cs  Iii Iz lCD  CD  o-  CD 1 CD  0 0  CD  0 Ml  P3 U)  it H0 i  Cl)  0CD hi  0 s  H  Q H Hit HC) P3 H  b  U)  P3  -  Q  CD P3  M) Q M  0-  “  I-I  Ci H  i 0 it  CD  II  0  0 U) CD  it  it 0  I—’ CD  b  U) U) H-  CD  Cl) C) C)  j  H-  0 it  CD Ii CD  CD H H HCD Ii  C)  Cl) CD i it H-  ‘z3  0  ()  E l CD  0-  Co  )  CD  hi  C  0-  CD 0  -  °  o  -J  U0 -  o  -•0  CO  I-SO  hi —.0  -o  ho  Co  •  -  F—  ColD  -o  C) I-CD  i—o  z  -h  i—.o rh(D CD hO  CD  0 I-i  hD(D  rho CD 0-rh  I-i ‘  ho  0-  oz_  C3’  fl 00  1  P,  bH’  h1  CD(D  CD  rrw  it J 0 U) CD  P3 U)  Cl) Ci C)  it U)  it CD  CD  it H-  d  CD U) C) I H-  Hit  P3 i.Q CD Ci)  I—I  •  CD IU) CD  0 ‘1  0 U) CD  H-  it  it CD  CD  it H-  d  CD U) C) lI H-  Cl  P3  Hit  CD  P3  H-  P3  0 Ml  0 U) CD  CD CD it  U)  L.Q H CD  U) H-  it 0  HH P3 II  U) H-  l  P3  -  -  H 0 it U)  b  HCo  ‘t5  -  hd 0  0 Ml  it U)  CT)  ‘tI  CD II CD  Cl) U)  ‘z5  C) 0  -  U)  tH-  d  P3 II H0 Ci U)  <1  it  M CD ‘tj ICD U) CD  it 0  Cl  Ci U) CD  1<  H  Cl) H-  P3  C) II CD  H-  it  Ci  i.Q  t  H H-  tT  Cl)  ‘Q  [‘-.)  0i  ii  0  Ml  0 i H ‘<  0 it  Cl  CD  1<  b H 0  CD  •  U) Cl) it HII CD U)  0 H Hit HC) P3 H  ‘rj  H U) Ci P3 H  •  .Q  “I H-  -  Cl) it  Ml 0 II  b II Hi it  (Cl CD it  Cl)  H  i  CD  <  it H0  P3  H 0 M  H--  U)  CD  0 Ml  Ml 0  )  Cl) it  CD  II Cl)  II 0  ‘t3  )  P3 U)  P3 H U) 0  Ci it  U) H-  CD  ‘—a  •  it  CD  CD  P3 C) it Ci P3 H  CD  it  CD  it  Cl) CD  CD  II CD id Ii  it 0  Cl  Ci  Cl) CD  P3 H Cl) 0  Cl)  (Ti  CD h  U)  Q  II  P3  C)  H Cl) ‘-< Hi iQ  Cl 1 Hit H0  P3  HI  P3 U)  H ‘-<  0  0 it  CD Cl  C) it H0  Ml Ci  ‘  CD I  <  CD  0  •  •  •  CD U) U) H0  C)  II 0  C)  0  ti  0 H CT)  Ci) II Cl)  U)  C) P3  HU)  H-  1(1)  ID  Ii-  0 Ml  CD  5 II 0 P3 ci U) H-  CD  F  •  LQ  H-  <  IP3  ‘-Q  CD  3 CD  0  (Cl II CD  —  -  P3 H Hit ‘-<  H-  H-  C)  HU)  b  0  b  -  0 Ml  Cl) it  H-CD i it  c).  (I)  it  ICD U) CD i  ‘ti  CD  CD  it  0  C) 0  P3  LQ  M CD U) U) H-  CD  it Cl)  CD  CD  it  HMl H CD I-I CD  Cl  0 F-t  Cl) CD II HCD U)  pi  ID I. I. I• 11d IH Ic lit  IFCo  Ic Ihb  I  CD  it  0 Ml  C) P3 U) CD  CD  it  HI  •  Ci  Hi H-  P3  ct  )  i  Hi  ti  I-I H-  ‘tJ H-  U) Ci C)  0 Ml  C) 0 U) it  CD  it  i.Q  CD CD ‘ZI H-  D’ ii U)  it  CD  P3 iQ  id  CD  0  0 i  ct  CD  it  P3  CD  p)  I-  Cl  b  P3  0 it  C) 0 Ci H  W  Cl  Cl)  r-s  H  •  U)  ‘‘i H-  U) CD CD  —  CD I—’ H HCD 11  C)  Hi  it  U) CD i  CD  II  Cl) ‘Z5  0 Ml  CD i it P3 it H0  o  CD  II CD ‘tj  CD  it  P3 it CD  Cl  0  C) C) 0  Cl,  ‘-<  it H  (1)  I H-  < CD  0  C)  ()  0 U) CD  it  CD  H H-  b II 0 P3 Cl U) HCl CD Cl)  0 Ml  P3 it  Ml 0  CD  ‘.Q  II  P)  I—’  CD  •  (1)  I. I. I.  IH-  IFIC1 l  I  hb 0 ‘C5 HU)  it J CD  CD H H HCD II  C)  •  IU)  Z  0 Ml  CD  id IP3 HU)  CD  rt  0  —a  H  H0  U) Cl) it H-  CD  it  Cl) Cl)  C)  Ci  U)  -  it CD < it  H  0  CD Cl  C) 0 i it P3 H-  U)  Cl CD  U) H-  Cl  II 0 P3  CD  0  (j)  •  Cl)  CD  <1  CD  0 II  H Cl) Cl) Ci CD Cl)  CD C) HMl H C)  U)  it  ‘ CD U) CD  b  M CD  it 0  Cl) CD  Ci  CD  CD ‘-  Cl CD Cl)  Cl) H  W II 0  28  communicated orally. 33  One satirical pamphlet  documenting Cellier included a short ballad.  Such  political ballads representing a Whig perspective which many were produced during this period) songs sung to established local melodies,  (of  were new  either by  professional ballad singers in the streets or by those 34 “hired to ball in coffee houses”. however were literate,  and for them,  Many Londoners immediate access to  descriptive texts in political imagery was possible.  It  has been estimated that in late seventeenth century London 76% of shopkeepers and craftsmen could sign their (given that most learned to read before they could  names write,  the percentage of those capable of reading was  probably even higher),  while women’s literacy is  estimated to have risen from 10% in mid century to 48% at the end. 35 The fact that the images representing Cellier were more expensive to produce than pamphlets high cost of engraving)  (because of the  did not mean that they were seen  by only those who could afford them.  Because of the  variety of methods used to circulate political imagery and texts during this period,  the potential existed for  several different kinds of audiences to view political 33 Harris, 102. Harris, Burke,  100. 49.  29  Coffee houses were a continual source of  imagery.  36 political news.  One contemporary complained in 1681  that “we have the Coffee-House Tables continually spread with the noisome Excrements of diseased and laxative 37 Scribblers”.  Political prints similar to those  representing Cellier also circulated in coffee houses and were posted on coffee house walls where more than one person could view them at a time.  It was also a custom  that proprietors of coffee houses kept packs of playing cards illustrated with images of various  ‘popish plots’  for their clients’ use in games and gambling. those who did not attend coffee houses, sold in marketplaces and bookshops, the outside of buildings, by,  or,  And,  for  broadsides were  as well as posted on  thrown into coaches of passers  if the political message was important,  simply  given away. But once Londoners came across the prints of Cellier,  how would such works have been viewed?  Although  it is near impossible to assess individual responses to such prints,  it is nonetheless certain that the political  context and distribution of the prints documenting Cellier would have informed the meanings of such images as derived by their London viewers.  In other words, the  manner in which “interpretive communities” responded to 36 Harris,  98.  Preface to Protestant Loyalty,  quoted in Harris,  98.  30  the representation of Cellier as  ‘popish midwife’  and the  Whig political message it contained would partly depend on the local political context I have outlined above. 38 With this context in mind, how,  it is necessary to analyze  to paraphrase Chartier,  the Cellier images and the  printed works by which they were conveyed organized a prescribed reading about both the issue of that of midwifery. 39  ‘popery’  and  How did the format and formal  characteristics of each image of Cellier attempt to address their different viewing audiences and impose a particular reading on those viewers?  Further to this,  what function did such images serve in the formulation of contemporary opinions about midwifery?  I will address  these questions through a close analysis of the images in the following two chapters.  Chartier,  157—8.  Chartier,  157—8.  31  CHAPTER TWO: CONSTRUCTING ELIZABETH CELLIER AS  ‘POPISH’:  THE PROCESS OF REPRESENTATION  In order to assess how the visual representation of Elizabeth Cellier operated to represent midwifery as a criminal practice,  I will analyze in this chapter how  Cellier was defined as a In The Popish...Plot Mock Procession... (Fig.  5),  (Fig.  ‘popish’ (Figs. 3),  threat to England. 1 and 2),  The Solemn  and The Happy Instruments...  Cellier’s representation was part of a complex  criticism of the Anglican Church and its political elite, which used the rhetoric of anti-Catholicism national danger it represented)  (and the  in order to rally  nonconformist Whig support for the Exclusion Bills. this larger critique,  In  Cellier would be associated on the  one hand with treasonous acts allegedly committed by Catholics against the state,  while on the other depicted  as a criminal capable of acting on behalf of the Anglican Church elite in the destruction of the Whig opposition. In my analysis of the three prints,  I shall explore  the ways in which Cellier’s representation as seemed to deem her represented)  ‘popish’  (and the midwifery practice she  as part of a system of Anglican religious  authority which presented a danger to the very survival  32  To do this,  it will first be necessary to establish how  the Cellier prints belonged to a tradition of printed political imagery of  ‘popish plots’.  This tradition of  representation would have provided London viewers with a ‘previous knowledge’  of the issue of  ‘popery’  and its  representation in the press; thus informing viewers’ perceptions of both Cellier’s alleged crimes and her midwifery practice. In addition to this tradition of imagery,  the Cellier prints were also of a particular  genre of political print. analysis,  ‘popish plot’  For the purposes of my  I shall consider as belonging to this genre  those pro-exciusionist prints of 1679-81, represented various view,  ‘popish plots’  which  from a Whig point of  in the form of inexpensive broadsides and single  sheet prints.  My basic conception of this genre works on  the premise that seventeenth century English viewers would have perceived such representations of ‘popery’ very differently than we do today. Michael Baxandall,  For,  in the words of  such viewers would have been  “equipped.. with different visual experience and skill .  and different conceptual structures.” of my analysis, then,  The second part  will assess how this genre  the subject matter and forms of these prints)  (both  created a  Michael Baxandall, Patterns of Intention: On the Historical Explanation of Pictures (New Haven and London: Yale UP, 1986) 106.  33  viewing context in which it became possible to perceive Cellier and the midwifery she represented as a perfidious element in,  and potential threat to the social fabric of  the English nation. Thirdly,  I will analyze how Cellier’s  ‘popish’  representation was part of a larger nonconformist critique of the Anglican Church which used the conventions outlined above to address Whig and nonconformist audiences, Exclusion,  not only over the issue of  but also in relation to the Anglican Church’s  (and midwifery’s)  involvement in matters of social and  political control.  This analysis will demonstrate how  the construction of Cellier as  ‘popish’  was politically  and religiously motivated and will serve as a basis for my discussion in Chapter Three of how these prints functioned to criticize midwifery and construct consensus about its definition among their seventeenth century viewers. Since the sixteenth century in England, popular street imagery in the form of single sheet prints and broadsides had been one of the main public forums which represented political events in terms relating to the danger of  2 ‘popery’.  Indeed,  according to M.D. George:  2 In addition to political prints, information about ‘popish plots’ during this period could also be acquired through Christian and astrological almanacs (which many households owned), playing cards, and emblem books. We know, for example, that the Meal Tub Plot was discussed in an almanac by John Gadbury in 1685. See Bernard Capp, Astrology and the Popular Press: English Almanacs 1500—1800 (London: Faber and Faber, 1979) 93—94. For the representation of ‘popish plots’ in emblem books, see M.D. George, English Political Caricature to 1792: A Study of Opinion and Propaganda Clarendon Press, 1959) 52. (Oxford:  34  “in the public mind recent history was largely a succession of plots” which had,  at politically  contentious moments during the early modern period, received much attention in the London popular press. 3 Generally speaking, ‘popery’  this tradition represented  as a shocking and serious threat to national and  societal unity.  Such accusations of  ‘popery’  had often  been used for the purposes of discrediting political and religious enemies in times of crisis.  A particularly  striking example of this is found in The Kingdomes Monster Uncloaked from Heaven  (Fig.  7),  a Civil War print  which represented--in the shape of a monster--a constellation of Roman Catholics and Cavaliers  (‘papist conspirators’)  (‘malignant plotters’).  combination of both image and text this  Through the ‘monster’--a  metaphorical construction depicting the dangers of Catholicism--is shown poised to destroy not only the Church and Parliament, but also the City of London and the entire Kingdom. Previous representations of  ‘popery’  such as this  attest to the fact that by the 1670s London viewers would have been familiar with a general form of anti-Catholic visual rhetoric which combined text and images in a  According to George, English fears of the re—instatement of Catholicism in England had been expressed in single sheet prints depicting the Spanish Armada of 1588, the alleged Gunpowder Plot of 1605, and the massacres of the so—called Catholic ‘Bloody This phenomenon would continue until the early nineteenth century. Mary’s’ reign. See George, 16.  35  manner which was often metaphorical.  This rhetoric  depicted ‘popery’  firstly as an abstract threat to the  Church and state,  and secondly as a more localized threat  to the safety of individuals. (Fig.  7),  The Kingdomes Monster...  which uses the construction of  ‘popery’  as a  means to criticize Anglican Cavaliers from a Puritanical point of view,  also revealá that the nonconformist  characterization of the Church of England as not a new phenomenon in 1680. Robin Clifton,  In fact,  ‘popish’ was  according to  seventeenth century English Protestants  “were educated from birth to make certain assumptions about the nature of the Catholic religion and.  .  .  it was  within the framework of these beliefs that accusations of [Anglican]  popish responsibility for the war were heard  and believed.” 4 The characterizations of the established church as ‘popish’  in exclusionist prints,  then,  would have been  particularly relevant to those Puritan viewers who had lived through the Civil War.  In fact, many of the Whigs  involved in campaigning for exclusion,  whom Christopher  Hill has called ‘the old Presbyterian interest’,  came  from Puritan families who had been politically active during Interregnum. 5  Within the context of the Exclusion  Robin Clifton, “Fear of Popery,’ The Origins of the Civil War, ed. Conrad Russell (London: Macmillan Press, 1973) 145. Christopher Hill, Co., 1980) 199.  The Century of Revolution,  1603-1714  (New York:  W.W. Norton and  36  Crisis, the representation of  ‘popery’ was therefore a  powerful and well-established means by which to address nonconformist audiences both over the issue of the Catholic Duke’s exclusion and with regard to the Church of England. The Cellier prints, ‘popish plot’  as part of this tradition of  imagery would represent  national and individual threat.  ‘popery’  In addition,  as both a however,  they also shared a number of characteristics common to the genre of the exclusionist print: represented many similar  ‘popish’  Firstly,  they  crimes and figures in  forms which would have signalled their Whig message of exclusion to nonconformist audiences;  secondly,  will be elaborated upon at a later point,  and as  they were  printed by publishers known for their Whig and nonconformist leanings. 6  These characteristics provided  a familiar framework through which their Whig and nonconformist audiences could perceive Cellier and midwifery as  ‘popish’  and criminal.  The subjects repeatedly represented in these prints were the London Fire of 1666,  (a fire which had  devastated much of the city),  the murder of the Whig  Justice Sir Edmund Bury Godfrey in 1678, the pope and devil,  and various English plotters  6 See page 50 below. George,  52.  (such as Cellier)  .  CO  Cn  0  H ‘< N  I-I h  CD CD  C)  ft CD  Q  Co  I-’ c-fl  Co  c-h  Co  0  ‘0 Co  0  I-,  Co  CD  0  CD  ft  II P3  CD ft  0  CD  ci  9)  H-  Co 0 D h) -0’  HH H  CD CD  H-  HCD  II  H < CD  P3  P3  CD  ft  H)  0  ci CD  ,.Q  ft H-  H-  II  C)  CD  Q H-  J  H-  HCD  C)  CD  -  C) CD H H HCD M  F-a  x  cDD) C,) hi  o F  ‘0  0  0--  CoN  c-c-n  (0(0  H- (0  flct  O(D  Cot Co )-  “‘0 Co  (DZ  ND’  Ii::0  0 H-c  0  ci  ,  CD  CD M  CD ‘-<  ft  0  CD  M  ci C) ft CD ci  CD  0  0  ft  CD  P3  C) 0 i CD ft  II CD  ci  CD  ci HCD C)  ft 0  CD  CD P3  93  -  ‘Q  H  I-  P3  H) 0 ii CD  93  CD  P3  ci  CD  CD CD I-1  0  •  0  H-  ci CD  H  C)  CD  0 II ft  ci  CD  ft  0  ci  H-  ci  H-  CD  ft CD  < CD  Cl) ft  93 b H  CD  CD  CD CD  ft  0  CD  9)  13  93  CD  -  H ‘-<  Q  H  ci  0  ‘t3  C)  0  •  -  ci  P3  -  C)  CD ft II  Q  C)  3  (Dc-h  H CoN  C)  ci  CD  D  0  HH H  HI  ci II  HCD  ‘ti  ft 9) ft H-  -to  --  Co  P3  0 H)  ‘ti  -  P3 CD  0(0  H HCl)  ft  P3 Ii  ‘ti  II CD CD CD  CD ‘t5  b  9)  ft  CD  II  CD CD  ft  WCo  c-rfl  Co  t°ihi  .  FCO  Hft  —  CD  ci  CD  ft  o  ft  CD  CD  C)  HP3  H H CD  p3  o  -  HCD CD  j  ft  3  h  CD ‘<  H HC)  o  C) P3 ft [  H it  CD CD  0  ft  H) 0  HH CD  ‘  0  H ci CD H-  C)  0  ft  H  C) P3 H  H-  P3 II  P3  CD  P3  CD i ft CD  <  D  ft  Q H  i  0  H-  ft P3 ft  0.CD CD M CD CD CD X  H)  CD  ct  <  Q  ft Q  —  C) Cl)  H P3 CD Cl) CD  H-  II  CD d  H-  < ‘-Q  CD  ft  II CD  ft CD  h  0  ‘z5 ‘ti  CD  C)  II  ci  C) J  9)  0  W ‘1  1  i  CD  H-  >‘  CD  H 0  P3 ft  H-  H  H) H-  H)  93  H  H C) P3  ‘tI 0 H Hit  P3  CD  H0 i  L  ft CD p3  I-’ H-  CD  I-  II  p3  H  HC)  II ct  p3  HCD  h  H) 0  0 i C) 0  P3 çt ft  -  CD  CD  CD  H-  <  0  Hi  3  CD  ‘d  2 CD  1<  ft H  CD  II  HHi H CD  H0  rt  C)  ci  H)  CD  II  CD Hi 0  Ii  CD  Q  H  ci  o  C)  o  CD H-  ci  C) H  lxi  CD  CD  -  CD  ;‘s  ci  H HC)  o  P3 ft  C)  CD  it  II  o  H)  ft  CD  t.Q ci  P3  P3  c  P3 CD  CD CD  II H-  C)  -  HCD  5  0  ‘•d  -  H)  0  H0  P3 ft  ft  CD  CD CD  CD :3  I-  :3  CD  ‘-a  •  ft [1 ci ct  -  CD  CD 0  0 H)  Cl)  0  P3 it H-  C)  Zj H HH) H-  CD  xi  CD  ‘t3 HC) P3 H  ft <  CD  P3  CD  CD CD  Y CD  ‘< CD  p3  P3 H  C) 0 ci H  ft  CD  CD  P3 H  ::3 CD 93 ft H 0  CD  Cl)  H CD  L  CD H  CD  ft  0 I-I  CD  H H)  H  p3 H  ci  H  H-  H s  CD  ct  ft ::y’ P3 ft  CD H H CD Hi  b  CD  ft  CD  9)  ft CD  CD  CD  C)  ci  CD  0 H)  ft H 0  9)  ft  CD  CD CD  CD  CD  ft  H  ft  Ii  ft P3  I-I  0  H  P3 CD  93 ft  -  CD  0  ft 9) ft H-  CD CD CD  II  CD ‘ti  h  93 11  ci H  0  ‘d  ‘.<  ci  it  C) CD  it  CD Ii ft CD CD  <  CD CD  H ‘<  CD 9)  Hi  0  ci  CD ft ci  P3  H-  -  93 II  H  C)  9)  ci II  P3  C/)  0  ft  iQ  H-  C) 0 II  C)  93  s:i CD CD ci  F-I H-  C) CD  HH) HC) 93  CD H-  9) F-’  C)  ft ‘< ‘t3 H-  II  CD H-  ft  0 I-I  H)  M  CD  ft  P3  Ii  ci ft  -‘  CD  C)  0 l it 9-)  h3  ci ci 9) H  H-  <  H  ci  H-  CD HII  D  ft  0 I-  Hi  ft  0  ft CD  II CD ‘ti II CD CD CD  CD  CD II  5 ft CD  CD  <  CD  ft 1:1’ CD CD CD  -.  H 0  CD  ‘ti  CD  ft  0 H)  II  CD  L  P3  H  H C) P3 H  Hft  H  0  e  CD II  0 ft  it 0  p3  H F-’  if) H  -J  (A)  38  contextualized, the result of which was the definition of midwifery as a  ‘popish’ practice.  The London fire of 1666, caused by Catholics, Popish.. .Plot  (Fig.  press was not new;  understood to have been  was represented in The 1)  The fire’s representation in the  .  indeed it had been discussed in a  series of anti-Catholic  ‘Fire Libels’  first these circulated secretly,  since 1667.  At  and then appeared in  enlarged versions after news of a  ‘popish plot’  had  spread and censorship had been lifted in 1679.  These  libels blamed the London fire on Roman Catholics, claiming that it was the Duke of York who had plotted with Jesuit monks to bring destruction to London.-° Functioning as an example of a reason for exclusion),  ‘popish’  criminality  (and as  the representation of the fire  in the Cellier prints served to address not only those who had survived the fire, but also those who shared the view that the London fire had been part of a larger Catholic conspiracy. In The Popish...Plot  (Fig.  1),  the fire is  represented as the first image in an overall narrative of ‘popish’  crimes.  The representation of the fire is  described in the caption that accompanied the print: George, 51. 10 This perception that Catholics were responsible for the fire was widespread; even the House of Commons believed it to have been started by papists. N.H. Keeble, The Literary Culture of Nonconformity in Later Seventeenth—Century England (Leicester: Leicester UP, 1987) 60.  39  The First describes the Burning of LONDON, which hath been proved undeniably by Dr. Oates. . .to be contrived and carried on by the Papists. A blessed Religion, that must be introduced by the ruin of so many thousand families! It is clear that this caption is designed to dictate to the reader that the representation of the fire is not only an image of a past event, but, more importantly, statement representative of the potential  a  ‘devastation’  which could be brought on by the Catholic religion. Informed viewers of  ‘popish plot’ prints during the  Exclusion Crisis would therefore have been aware of the fire’s status as the so—called beginning of recent ‘popish plot’ history.  In The Popish...Plot  (Fig.  1),  the images of Cellier, positioned in the middle row (following the well—known image of fire in the first row) constructed her not only as part of a broader context of Catholic crimes, but also imbued her alleged crime and her status as a midwife with some of the danger felt by those Londoners who had experienced the fire. The London fire is also alluded to in The Solemn Mock Procession...  (Fig.  3),  originally sold as programme  for and promotion of the Whig pope-burning procession of November,  1680.  November 17th,  Elizabeth I’s accession,  the anniversary of Queen  had long been regarded as a time  of Protestant celebration.  During the Exclusion Crisis  it became a focal point for the pope-burning processions in 1678,  1680,  and 1681,  each of which was designed to  40  create popular sentiment for the Duke of York’s exclusion.  The processions and subsequent pope-burnings  were considered a symbolic act of retaliation to the alleged burning of London by Catholics.” (of which nine occurred in 1680 alone)  These parades  took place at  night and circulated through many of London’s nonconformist neighbourhoods in front of audiences of up to 10 000,  and ended with the burning of effigies of the  pope and other Catholic figures huge bonf ire.’ 2  (such as Cellier)  in a  Such a dramatic scene would not have  failed to conjure up strong anti—Catholic sentiment. The circulation of procession prints such as The Solemn Mock Procession...  in market stalls, book shops  and coffee houses would therefore serve as a reminder, not only of the event, but also of what it represented for many Protestant Londoners: the symbolic destruction of those Catholics who had  (as it was commonly thought)  burned London to the ground just fourteen years earlier. The text introducing this engraving refers to the Fire of 1666 as one of the reasons why the procession took place: You must first know the occasion of this Mock Procession to have been, that the Pope, Fryars, and their Abettors here in England, contrived the Lamentable Burning of London; some Protestant Gentlemen, partly in a thankful Commemoration of their Deliverance, and partly to raise a just Peter Burke, “Popular Culture in seventeenth century London,” Popular Culture in seventeenth century England, ed. Barry Reay (London: St. Martin’s Press, 1985) 31. 12 Tim Harris, London Crowds in the Reign of Charles II: from the Restoration to the Exclusion Crisis (Cambridge:  Propaganda and Politics Cambridge UP, 1987) 121.  41 Abhorrency of such Popish practices, do now bring these Incendiaries in Effigie to the Fire they have better deserved. Whig organizers of the procession therefore exploited the notion  (which by this time had become a well-known myth)  that the fire had been started by Catholics so as to secure the support of locals in their attempt to pass the Exclusion Bills.  In doing so,  they depicted the fire as  one event in a larger conspiracy of so—called ‘popish’ crimes for which associated criminals like Cellier were deemed automatically guilty.  The representation of  Cellier within such a context deemed her as dangerous to the well-being of Londoners as the fire itself. The murder of Sir Edmund Bury Godfrey was one of the most frequently represented events with which Cellier would be associated in exciusionist prints. murder in 1678,  After his  which had sparked local anxieties about a  so-called ‘popish plot’, many prints were produced which advocated that Godfrey had been murdered by Catholics (see, Fig.  for example, 6).  The Murder of Sir Edmund Bury Godfrey,  In The Popish.  .  .Plot  (Fig.  1),  depicted being murdered in image number  Godfrey is ‘II’.  The  description below claims a pro-Catholic motivation behind Godfrey’s murder:  “to deter all other Magistrates from  intermedling with any Affairs relating to the Plot”.  The  combination of text and image here functions as an ironic forewarning to all Protestants,  that the ongoing ‘popish  -  ‘  °  .  --  °  “  -  o  CD  -  o  CD  Hi  0  Co  $1  0 Fl  ft J CD  H  CD •  ft H-  Di  Di Co  ft Co  Di  0 Hi  CD Di  $2  H-  CD  •  ft CO  HCo  Fl 0 ft CD Co ft P.’  pi  ft CD CO ft  Fl 0  Co ft  H-  Dl  ‘.Q  Di  H 0 ft CO  Co  Fl 0  1 CD  Fl  ft  Di ft  0 Hi  Di C) Fl CD  ‘<  ft  Di  Co Co  0 H HC)  ct  Di  C)  H CD  b  Hft Di  <  CD  H-  ft  Di  ft  ft CD Co  o  i-  CD $2  Co ft Di tY H HCo  CD  0 Hi  Co CD II HCD Co  Di  H-  Co ft  Fl  Hi H-  CD  ft  Di CO  CD  I-  CD  Fl CD CO CD i ct CD $2  d  Fl CD  Co  ft  Fd Fl Di i C) CD  Hi  0  CD  ‘-Q  Di  H-  HCo  ft  Dl Co  CD Fl  $2  Fl  Co  -  Hi Fl CD ‘<  $2  0  0  -  Dl  C) CD Co CD  J H-  CD  ft  H-  CD Fl 0  0 C) Di H  H  Di  $2  Di  -  Co  0 ft  H  ‘t5  CO  CD  C) Fl H-  HCO  ft  Co  -  CO ft Di ft CT)  CD  ft  H-  CD Cl) Cl)  Hft  CD “<  Di  CD  C) Di  CD  b  ‘d -f-I Di 0 ‘ZI C) HCD  CO ft  i-LQ LJ Dl HH  •  II CD Co Cl)  d  Hi 0 Fl  Hi CD Co Co H0  C) 0  HCo  0  ‘d  •  C) I-I CD  i  H-  ft  H 0 ct  ‘d  “< CD  Di H H  Hi  0  0 ft  CD  ft  0 CD  $2  i  $2  H-  $2  (1) Fl  $2  c II  Co  -  Fl CD ‘.<  Hi  $2  0  0  ••  ‘.  H-  CO Di ‘<  $2  c-fCD  ICD Co CD  CD d  h  HCo  ‘<  CD  Hi Fl  $2  0  0  HH H  ft 0  ‘t3 H 0 ft  CD  ft  Hi  0  ft  I-  Di  ‘d  Di  CD  ft 0  Cl) $2  H-  i  C) H  1  Di  D  0  CD  C)  Di I  Fl  ‘i  •  I-I  ft  Fl H-  ‘d  CD  ft  0 Hi  0  •  •  •  ft Co  CD  I-I  CO ft  H  <  d ‘d  P1  CD  F-  H-  $2  H-  I-  0 ft  $2 <1 0  Dl  0  Dl H CO  HCO  CO  ft  ft P.)  ft CD CO  II 0  C) Di ft CD  Fl  CD  CD  ft  i  F-f  •  —  Cn  •  .Q  2i H-  —  II  0 ft D CD  0 Hi  $2 CD Fl  Fl  C  CD  ft  i Co ft  H-  Dl  l  iQ  Di ‘1 5 H-  Di  Di Co  CD Di ft  $2  CO  -  <  Hi Fl CD  0 $1  0  -  Di ft  •  CD <  t-$  Hi  0  $2  0  CO ft HC) CD  C.  Fl  tj CD  CD  J CD  -  Q  CO Di ‘< H-  HC) CD  C)  CD  CO 0  CD  0 H  Q  Dl  Hft  Co  Di  ft H0  Di  ‘tJ  C)  CD  ft  Hi  $2  CD  H-  Fl  CD CO C)  $2  HCO  0  Di i  CD H H  b  Di  ‘-<  b  $2  ii C) CD  $2  Hi ft Fl 0  HCo  $2  Di  0  Hft  Co  CD  C-i  i  CD Fl  $2 CD Fl  f-I  Di H H CD $2  C)  Co 0 I  D HCo  $D ‘<  Fl Fl HCD i  Dl  C)  HCo  ‘<  Fl  CD  F-h  $2  0  0  $2  i  CD  $2  CD  i-  •  ‘ti II Q C) CD CO CO H0  CD  ft  H-  Hi HFl Co ft  CT)  J  ft  Di Co  $2  CD  HC) ft  CD  $2  HCo  CD  CD  Fl  CD  (i  •  i  “I H-  —  •  •  •  0  CD Co Co H-  ()  ‘ti II 0  0 C)  i  C/ 0 H CD  J CD  i  H-  ft  $2 CD  H-  <  CD  0  Di H Co  HCO  CO  c-f-  CD Co ft Di  ft  I-I 0  ft 0  .Q  H-  Di I-I  CD  Hi 0 Fl  pi  Di Co  CD  t.Q  Di  H-  Co  -  CD ‘<  Hi Fl  $2  0  0  0 Hi  CD  CO  HCo  CD H ‘<  H-  H  Di Co  HLQ Co  -I  D CD  0 ft  Hi  0  Fl  Fl $2 CD  ct D CD  -.  C Cl) I-’0  H  C)  CD  0 Hi  0 i  H-  ft  Di  ft  CD  I-I CD FC3 Fl CD Co  H-  Hi 0 Fl  0 ft CD  i 0 ft  $2  $2  CD ‘<  ft  HHi  ft  Di  ft  C) CD Co  CD  ft 0  HC)  t3 ‘-<  Co  Dl  CD  Di  Di Co  ‘  CD  ft  ‘  CD  •  ft Co  i  ft CD Co ft  0  Fl  H HCo  Q CD <  S I-  Li  Fl  CD  0  :5 ‘<  Di  Hi  0  II :i CD t-  Hi  ii 0 $20 H$2  Di  Di Fl  $2  Di  Co  ICD Co  C)  U  CD  ft  H  ft  H  Fl CD Co  $2  H  C) 0  H  Hi  Co  Co  CD  C) C)  Co  CD  H ft  $2  H  0  CO  H 0 ft  43  Lord Chief Justice Scroggs, presided at Cellier’s trial)  (the Whig Justice who Catholics had:  indeed, ways of conversion.. .by enlightening our understandings by a faggot, and by the powerful and irresistible arguments of a dagger; but there are such wicked solecisms in their religion that they seem to have left them neither natural sense nor natural consience, by their cruelty, who make the Protestants’ blood as wine, and the priests thirst after it. 4 1 The Protestant fear of a Catholic massacre,  then,  was  exploited in order to convince viewers of the necessity for exclusionist policies.  In the lower portion of the  print this myth is reiterated in the representation. cardinal is depicted whispering to another,  One  with the  caption indicating the dialogue as concerning the destruction of England  “.  .  .by a general massacre”.  The  image in conjunction with the text would have thus confirmed for viewers an already established notion that Catholics were dangerous to one’s own personal safety. In order to further convince viewers that the above ‘popish’  crimes had been committed by Catholics,  Solemn Mock Procession... Instruments  (Fig.  5)  (Fig.  3)  The  and The Happy  represented the pope with a devil  whispering in his ear.  Such a representation of the pope  and devil together was a well—known Reformation image, which for many Protestants symbolized the anti-Christ.’ 5  14 Lord Chief Justice Scroggs quoted in Kenyon, 15 George, 5.  4.  H  5  Hi  Cs)  d  Ci  CD  P3  CD  ‘—3  H  p-s  I-.  Cl)  CD  CD  it  H CIcL  o  CD  :-  it  II  o  ii H  (I)  CD  I-  o  CD  it  CD Ci)  p3  H-  Cl)  0  0  CO  p-s  H 0 it  CD I-  CD H IH-  C-)  Mi  0  CD  H-  it  II  p.  CD  it CD  CD  H  0  cn  ‘—3  HC)  ‘CI  CD  Cl  H-  it 0  HCl)  CD  M CD Cl  Cl  0 CD it’d • HC) it CD CD Cl II  H  CI.’  Ci HCO  H I  H -  CD  it  H‘.Q  3 0  H  HI  H  CD  CD  it  HH H  it 0  ‘(5 it H-  P3 it it CD  p3  ‘-3  0  ‘t  CD  H-  Cl  it CD  Ci) CD  CD  ‘-  ‘CS  ii CD  HCO  CD  Co  CD I-I CD  H  •  C)  H-  2j  -  • ‘(5 H 0 it  •  •  -‘(5 H< Hf CO 3 -  CD  ‘Q  <  -  CD  P3 SC)  H-  — H3  Cl  P3  ‘-<  I  tY Ci  P3 Mi it CD CO  Cl)  HP3  CD  CD  CD t-  it  H3  M 0 H CD  CD M  II  0  Hi  ‘1  h CD Cl) it CD Cl  II CD Hi  P3 H CO 0  CO  CD  CD M  —  ‘—  Ci  CD  ‘-C)  •  P3  ‘(5 H 0 it it CD f-  p3  P3 Cl)  I-h  0  LQ  0 P3  CD H3  CO  LII P3 ‘1 H  tY  P3 C) it H-  H-  3j  -  0 3 • • •  CD  d M  0 C)  0 C)  CD CO CO  it  C) H  H  it  HH H it P3  C)  P3  Hi  CD <  P3  Cl)  P3  I-  CD  CD  H 0  CO CD i it P3 it  Hi  H-  CD  II  F  I(D  H-  :3  Q  CO H-  Pj  II  Ci  ‘CI  0 it  H  CD  3’  it  3  II  it Ci  it 0  CO  CD  3’  itO 3 H3 it  HCl. CD  CD  C).’ CD  P3  P3 H CO 0  CO  H-  HC) Hit ‘<  it H0  C)  Ci  0 ‘(3 H  C)  Hi CO it  Hit  Ci H H  b  P3 ‘(5 P3 H  ‘z3  CD I  •  Cs)  it CD II HP3  <  b  ii CD Cl)  Ci)  0 H Cl  -  ‘(5 H CD  P3  CD  Hi 0 I  II  HCD  CD H H  C)  CO •  it CD 1  ‘CI H 0 it  Lii 3 Q H HCO  it 0  CD ICl)  ‘-  $1  0  it J  t.C)  H-  P3 it  ‘-C)  H H  3 P3  II  Hi  CD  H  HI  CD  CD  CD  C)..  Cl  it CD  0 it  it  CO CD  Cl II P3  CO  H-  CD II  CD  H-  CD  it  0 Hi  Ci Cl)  C)  o  Hi  CD  CD  CD ‘(3 II  II  HCl)  CD  ‘(3  ‘CS 0  CD  it  CD II CD  •  CD  c  p3  H  C)  0  C)  CD  CD  Ui  •  ‘-C)  H-  I  it CO • •  CD  3 CO it h Ci  HI  ‘<  ‘(5  ‘(5  P3  CD  ‘-3  H-  Cs)  Ci  H0  <  tY  0  0 CO ct  co  D  CO  II CO -  Cl)  P3  CD II  CD  P3  ‘CI  H H-  C) CD H  3.’  C)  3 H-  0 Hi  CD  C) P3 Ci CO  C)  H-  0 H  ii  H HCO  C)  Lii l-  CD  CD  CO  Ci  0  C) H-  H-  II  H  C) P3  P3 Cl)  CD Cs)  H-  II  C)  -  ‘CI 0 ‘(5 HCO  I-  H P3  Ci  II it HC)  ‘(5 P3  it CD 1  II CD Co CD  ‘-  CD  ‘CI CD  0  •  it P3 3 it HCs)  Co  II 0 it CD  HCs)  H  ‘.Q  3  Lii  CD CO it HC)  0  Cl  it 0  J II CD P3 it Co  it  H 0  0 Hi  t-  tY’ CD  Ci  P3  Cl  CD 3 it CD  Cl)  CD  I-  it  ‘CI  P3  CD  Ii  H CO 0  P3  II H3 it CO  ‘(5  CD Co CD  ct  C)  CD  it  it 0  HN CD II CO  p3 it  d  ‘<  it it  0  H  ‘CI  J.’  H HCs)  ‘-C)  LII 3  P3 H  C)  H 0  0 Hi  3  H0  0  it  CD  ‘-3  •  —  CD  0  CD . H ‘<  CD s.C)  p3 H H  II  CD  ‘CI  Co  H-  C) ‘-<  P3  Hl-  ‘(3  3 CO  0  C)  0 H HC)  3  P3 it  C)  ‘-C) CD M  ‘1  H P3  P3  i  H-  H H3 3 C) CD  ‘(5  C) 0  Cl)  it  H-  I  ‘CI  I-  CD  CD H H H-  C)  CD  3  it  0  Hi P3 M  0  CO  HCo C) Ci CO CO CD l  Q  CD  <  P3  HI  I  •  it HCO  ct CD CO it P3  0  I  I  CD H HiC) H0 3  II  -  CD  it tCi  CD  it  Hi  0  CD CO HCs)  3 it Hit  P3  CD  it  P3 CO  CO  H-  P3 ct D’ 0 H HC)  Hi  C)  P3  it H0  ‘CI  C) CD  ‘CI CD II  it  3  it P3  CO  ii 0 it CD  I-  P3  HH H-  Hi P3  Cl ‘<  P3  CD  II  P3 H  P3  CD Cl  C)  h  0  H3 Hi  CD  II  CD  Ii  P.’  H  Ci  0  it Cs)  ‘ H-  ‘CI  CD  CD CO  it  H  it H 0  P3  it  CO CD  CD  II  CD ‘(3  CD  it H it H  CD  (5  CD  fr  H it Cs)  CO  Ci  45  attempts to re-establish Catholicism in England.  Because  it was argued that Catholicism could only be reinstated in England through the agency of local sympathizers, Cellier’s characterization as facilitator would have deemed her extremely dangerous to English society.’ 6 Indeed in the words of one Whig Member of Parliament in an address to the  (mostly Anglican)  House of Lords,  only  when such English Catholics were completely removed from England would it be safe from the treasonous threat they represented: You have not yet made any steps towards the safety of the kingdom. It is not removing popish lords out of the House (that will do it), nor banishing priests and Jesuits, nor removing the Duke from the King; but it must be removing papists from the nation. As long as such a body of men are here you must never expect that the Pope, with his congregation de propaganda fide, will let you be at Till you do that, you do nothing; when that rest. is done you need not trouble yourself with the succession. 17 Typical of other exciusionist prints and in keeping with much seventeenth century political imagery,  the  well-known events in the Cellier works were depicted through a detailed combination of verse, imagery.  text and  Such a form of representation was a useful  means by which to depict events and individuals in a way that could be metaphorical and often intentionally cryptic. 16 Kenyon,  For example,  92.  17 Quoted in Kenyon,  92.  in The Solemn Mock Procession...  CD  CD  0 I-1  0 CD  H-  I-C  CO  -  I-$  P3  P3  H-  ‘-Q  it H-  HCD  P3  H-  ‘CI  H-  C)  it H-  I-  ‘-CI P3  I-C  CD  CD H  C) P3 it Ci  H-  II  P3  C)  H  3  Ci  $2  H-  H-  $2  CD $2  CD P3  $2  CD  it  “<  I-C  CO  3  H-  H  P3  C)  H-  it  0 H H-  ‘-CI  C)  Ci  Cs)  •  CO  I-$  CD  CD  H-  it 0  CD  it  3 iQ  H-  P3  ‘<  b  I-C CD CO  I-h H-  sQ Ci  CO CD  CD  it  Cs)  $2  I-$  P3  it 0  0 I-C  Ci CO  0 H)  Cl)  CD  .  Hit Ci  CO C)  LQ CD  it P3  P3  ct  it  H 0  Ci  HC)  H-  1  M  P3  d ‘-U CD P3  CO  P3  $2  CD  CD  L.Q  $2 CD  CO it  H  P3 H H  H  •  C)  H-  0  C)  CD  T  it 0  it  CD P3  ‘<  H1  I P3 I-C  P3 Cl)  CD II  : CD  0  CD  0  ‘-CI it Cl) II  p3  C)  Hi  II II HCD 0 $20 • I-h  ‘CI CD  Cl)  it ‘  H-  H-  CD  it  CD  $2  ‘Q  it  Ci I-C  $2 Hi  CD  Cl)  CD  it  0 I-C  ‘<  it  CD  H-  M  ft 0  t3 0  C)  t5 H H-  ‘CI Ci  P3  $2  ‘CI  h CD  ‘<  CD  Ci 3 Ci Cl) Ci P3 H  CD II CD  it  H CO  p3  H3  H-  C) Ii  HCl)  D. Ci P) H  H-  H-  H  Di CO  C)  Hi  1  U)  HC)  H) 0  it  C)  3  CD H  CD  P3 it  J  it  0  H-  HI-C  C) M  CD  CO  p3  it  C)  CD  I-$  it J HCs)  I-C  it  H-  H) 0  it  HCl)  CD C)  L.J  ty  0  it  I-I  I-  II  .  •  P3  C) Ci H  I-I it H-  d P3  P3 it CD  0 C) H-  CO  CO  ‘Q  H-  0  CD  0 I-h  CO  CD P3  P3  P3 CO  P3 it H0 3  it  3  CD  M CD ‘CI I-$ CD CO  0 H)  H) C) t-  H  C) P3  HIH-  it  CO P3  HCO  it  -  P3 $2 CD  I-C  CD  Ci  P3 CO  X  H-  I-C CO  CD  LQ H  Ci  C  -  CO  P3  CO 0 5 CO  I-C  ‘-tI P3  P3  H HC)  i.Q  3  3’  it D CD  H)  0  CD  H  P3  ‘-CI  CD N  CD  it  0  it  II  Ci  CD it  I-C  0  ‘-  •  P3 H  C)  H-  I-C  it H-  p3  CO  it CD 3  0 H)  CO 0  P3 H  P3 CO  HCO  HCO  ‘-  C)  H-  H0  Cl)  Ci  C) H  i N  CD  it  H3  M  Ci  $2  •  H0  -  CO  II “<  Ci  H  C)  CD N  $2  CD  it  ‘-CI 0 I-C  Ci ‘CI  CO  C)  H-  0  it H-  CD  ‘-CI  0  ‘-CI  -  0 H)  it H0 3  it P3  CO CD  1 CD  CD ‘CI  II  CO  H P3  0 ‘U Ci  ‘d  H  J  3 it  0  HCO it CO  0 I-C  H)  C)  0  3  P3 3 ‘-<  CO CD  P3  Ci  C)  tY’ CD  C)  H-  H0 3  it  H3 CO it Hit Ci  P3  C) C) C) CD CO Cl) H0  Ci  H  iC  CD  it  0 H)  0  l)) it H-  it  CD  CO  CD  M  H-  CO it  P3  II  CD d  Cl)  CD  it  0  I-C  I-’C  CD  H P3 I-C  CD  it  H)  0  CD  HC)  0  3 it it H-  it  P3  C)  CD  it  1  0 II rt CD  ‘tI  t5  Ci  Cl)  ct  H-  CD  CO  CD ‘tI -‘C CD  I  M CD  CD  H-  3 CO  C) 0  C) P3 H  0 I-C H-  ‘-CI  CD it P3  $2  P3  HC) P3 H  J  $2 0 C)  CO ‘-< 3 CD C)  Di  CD  Q  H-  <  ‘-CI I0  CO  Ci  rt CO  $2  H  Ci  0  C)  CO  CD  I-C  Ci  .Q  H) H-  CD  CO  CD  3  ct  0 H)  0  it P3 it H-  II CD CO CD  CD ‘CI  I-C  CD  •  0  CO CO H-  Ci C) C) CD  H  0  it  H-  p3  C)  3 HCO  H-  0 II  I-<  I-h  0  CD  Ci  C)  H-  0 H  3’  C) P3 it  CD  it  CD  çt  0 II  ‘t3  Ci  CO  ‘t3  F-  CO  CD CO  CD H  t)  0 3 CD it  3  ‘  P3 it H0 3  H-  0  CD  $2  b ‘<  it  it P3  CO  CD  it  ‘d II 0  ‘.Q  0 Ci  it  P3  0  CD  ft  H H-  CD  C)  I-C  Ci  C)  3  C) P3  H-  H  i iQ  3  P3  it CD $2  CD Co CD  II  CD ‘CI  I-  CD <  3  it  ‘  3  C)  Co Ci  P3 CO  $2  3  P3  CO  0  Cl)  P3 I-C  ‘-CI  3  H HC) P3  3 ‘.Q  0 H)  it it HI-C CD  P3  CD  it  H-  CO Co CD  M CD  CD  II  CD  CD I-C CO  it  P3 C)  II  P3  C)  CD CO CD  ‘--a  -  1D  •  CD  $2  P3  I-$  CD  Ci  Q  CO  P3  H-  II Cl)  L Ci ‘-Q H CD  -  l)3 Cl)  0  ct  CT) 1  II  CD  H)  II  CD  i  I-$  CD  i-C  P3  CD  C) CD H H H-  p.  H  CI CD  CD $2  it  CO CD  CD  ‘CI  CD  I-C  CO  CD  I-C  Ci  H) H-  CD  it  H t.Q  hj  —  CD  Co  CD Co  Di  S  Di  H-  5  LI  o  Ft  HCl)  ‘-a  0 H  Co CD LI HCD Cl)  Cl) •  P.’  Pi Co  it CD  C)  Ci  it LI  i Co  0  CD  C)  Di  HCO  —  H  •  S  0 H-  0 Co CD  5  bj HiQ  H 0 it  •  •  •  HCl)  0  D CD  LI H-  C)  -  HCl)  o  d  C) 0  LI  -  pi LI LI Di it H-  H  )  HC)  Q  0 H 0  LI 0  C)  Di II it H0 Ci H Di  3 it H3 l.Q  CD  Co  CD  II CD j LI  •  CD  LQ  CD Cl) Co Di  5  ‘t 0 H Hrt H0 Dl H  HCo  H-  it 3 CD HLI  CD LI Co  HCD  <  0  ‘t5  Cl  H  Ci  0  C)  it  Cl  0 0  ‘-<  H Di LI H  Ci  C)  LI H-  Dl LI it H-  ‘t3  Di LI CD  (-i.)  •  Q  H-  1  .—.  •  •  •  I0 C) CD Co Co H0  0 C)  X  S  b  H-  CD  Pi 3 Cl  I-’  •  ‘-Q  H-  i  -  it  HLI  CD  it  HN CD  t  0  C)  LI CD  CD CD  <  CD  Di  çl  Ci  0  -.  0 H-  5  0 3 Co it LI Di it CD  CD  p  p) H H  to  H  1)) Co  J  HC)  H  Co  H-  .Q  H-  F3 Di LI it H0 Ci I-’ Di LI H <  Di to  CD LI Cl)  CD  <  <  H  •  •  •  HCl)  0  CD  Ji 0 it D’  •  C) it H0 3  Ci  Cl) it II  C)  0 H CD  C/)  F-’Cl) it  Cl) H0  Ci  C) H  CD  Di 3  0 H  S  H 0 LI  CD  it  0  0  H CD Cl)  H  it 0  d  P)  S  CD p  H-  Cl)  t.Q  t  5  Co  H) 0 LI  it  HF-h H CD LI CD  Cl  0 0 ‘S  it  CD ‘-<  it  HCl)  it  0 I—h  LrJ CD C) Di Ci Co CD  •  CD LI Cl)  it LI 0  0  C) CD  -  H 0 it  ‘-  HCl)  ‘-d  0  -  CD  it  CD H CD Cl) Co  CD it  3 0  ‘-<  CD  it  it  C)  CD  ‘ti  LI (1) Co  HCl)  0 F-h  it  CD 0 it Co  H-  HH Di LI  5  Cl) H-  d  Di Cl)  HH H CD LI CD 3 it  Cl) CD LI CD  it  Cl) F-’N CD Q.  H-  LI  ‘d  )  ‘  CI  CD H H HCD LI  C)  CD  it  0 H-,  3  C)  Di  CD  D HH CD  •  HCD  0 H  it  0 H-  C) H Ci CO H0 3 HCl) it  CD  LI 0 I  ‘t3  Di  CD 3 it CD Cl  CD Co  LI  LI CD  CD ‘-<  it  it  Dl  t  CD LI Co  < HCD  it 0  Q  3 PH H CD  .Q  F-’-  CO LI  CD  CD  Di  Cl  H  Ci  0  CD  it  CD Cl)  S  H-  0 LI  -  HCl)  0  ‘d  -  CD Cl) CD  t  0  P1 rt H0 3  it  LI CD CD CD  d  Ci  CD  CD it Hit H-  CD  LI  CD  •  Co  LI  I—h 0 LI  5  H, 0 LI  H CD  t5  Di  Cl  LI CD Di  Di  H-  0  CD CD  Cl)  ct LI CD Di  0 M  P1 C) it Cl)  0 H HC)  it  P-  C)  H-  <  LI <  C) CC) 3 it  çt D  < CD 3 it CD CD  CD  Cl)  H-  LI  0 H-,  1D CD LI  S  Ci  H Di LI  Ci  C)  it H-  LI  Di LI CD  Ci  Dl  it 0  CD Cl  ‘Q  t3 CD H 0  ‘ti  Di  Cl  it CD  C)  H-  Cl CD  J  C)  H-  it  H Ci it  it 0  Cl)  .Q  H-  LI  Di  0 LI CD  LI H3 it Co  d  LI  Di Co  CD  C) CD H H H-  it D CD  0  CI)  it H H3  Ci  0  Cl)  S  HCo it  Cl) H0  Ci  C) H  CD  0  LI CD  CD  ‘-Q  CD  C) LI H-  -  HCl)  ‘d  ‘t5 0  -  II  p3  H• H  H-  Co  J  Cl)  it 0  HCo  it  0 H-  d  HCl)  it  it 0  1 0  it 0  CD Q  rt  5  it it CD  •  CD LI Co  d  Di  Cl)  Ci  0  Cl) 0  pi  p.1  <  it II CD  0  H0  CD  Di  F-I  P1 it  0 Co Cl) CD Co  ‘d  CD  I I it  Cl  CD  Ci Co  C) C)  Dl  Cl) CD 3  t5  Cl  Di  CD  Cl)  H0  0 H  Di C) çt  H  P1  H-  5  CD  it  LQ  Hit it H-  5  5  0  C)  -  Ci  ‘—a  H  CD Di  LI  Y’ CD  it  H-  3  0  Co  P1 CD  CD  co  ‘  CD II  t  C) LI II p H-Ct  LI CD  Ci  CD Di it  L  H  Cl)  H-  Ci  ‘-Q  3  HCl) it H-  Cl  LI  CD  it  0  i LI CD  Cl) H0  Ci  1 HCD C)  LI  CD  1  LI H3 it Co  ‘zI  CD  it  0 I—h  CD CD  LI  it  Di H H  H-  -  pi 1 Pi C) it CD LI H Co it H0 Co  C)  HC) P1 H  <  —3  48  in fact created for the purposes of representing ‘popish’ plots and was increasingly used by Whigs during the Exclusion Crisis;  (see also the print The Murder of Sir Fig.  6) 19  structure of such prints,  then,  Edmund Bury Godfrey,  By only glancing at the contemporary viewers  would have known that this image was a Whiggish representation of  ‘popery’.  In order to construct a  convincing argument for exclusion, crimes had to appear linked,  the alleged ‘popish’  as if parts of an overall  Catholic scheme to take England.  This narrative  structure was therefore a useful form through which to represent unrelated events Cellier’s crimes) interdependent.  (such as the London fire and  as if they were causally Thus the very structure of the image  itself helped to construct Cellier’s  ‘popish’ persona,  establishing her place in the purported Whig history of such plots. The Solemn Mock Procession.  .  .  (Fig.  3)  was another  print whose form would have expressed to viewers its Whiggish political mandate.  The structure of The Solemn  Mock Procession... was similar to other Whiggish procession prints as it represented the procession in three separate rows in the upper portion of the image  19 We know that as early as 1627, this format was being used to represent ‘popish’ plots in Popish Plots and Treasons, from the beginning of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth (BM 13). This print depicted among other events, the reign of the Protestant Queen Elizabeth, the Spanish Armada, and the Gunpowder P1st. See George, 16.  49  with a descriptive text below. 20  Similar to The  Popish.. .Plot 1 this form created a structure in which different  ‘popish’  crimes and figures could be  represented together in one cohesive, ‘history’.  However,  chronological  it’s form was also reminiscent of  previous official procession prints depicting the annual Lord Mayor’s parade. ’ 2  Indeed,  according to Peter Burke,  these pope-burning pageants and their representation in print were “a kind of inverse Lord Mayor’s Show,  designed  22 to criticise rather than to justify the authorities.” By mimicking this previously  ‘official’  form of  representation, the Whigs could therefore bring authority to their political and religious claims concerning exclusion and the established church. In comparison, Instruments...  the format of The Happy  (Fig.  the other two prints.  5)  was not so overtly Whiggish as It was produced in April of 1681,  at a time when not only belief in the  ‘popish’  and Meal  Tub Plots was on the wane amongst the general public, but a well-known Whig engraver,  Stephen College, had recently  been found guilty and executed for libel in an Anglican 20 The producers of this particular procession print made the claim (at the bottom of the engraving) : “There will be no other true Representation of this Procession but This comment reveals that there was likely some commercial competition in the this”. At least two other procession prints from 1680 still exist. selling of these prints. See BM 1072 and BM 1074 in M.D. George, Catalogue of Prints and Drawings in the British Museum, Political and Personal Satires (London: Chiswick Press, 1870) 21 For examples of representations of the Lord Mayor’s procession, and a historical discussion of the parade see David M. Bergeron, “The Lord Mayor’s Shows,” English Edward Arnold, 1971) 123—217. Civic Pageantry (London: 22 Burke,  31.  50  Church clamp down on censorship. 23 coup, the King,  Shortly after this  with the help of the Anglican gentry,  took control of the London corporation from local 24 Whigs.  Partly because of the recent execution of  College and partly because of this political situation, this image was intentionally cryptic in its criticism of the established church.  The whole engraving, which  contained only metaphorical references to Catholicism, could nonetheless be interpreted as either a direct criticism of the Catholic Church,  or as a parody of the  institutional hierarchies that the Anglican Church represented for nonconformists. Another characteristic of these exciusionist prints which would have further established their Whig message was the fact that they were printed by Whig supporters. •This was because during this period a printer’s name on broadsides and single sheet prints was an important indication to viewers of the political opinion they 25 represented.  For example,  The Popish.  produced by an established Whig printer,  .  .Plot was Richard Baldwin,  whose name appears on the bottom right of the broadside (see: Fig.  2)  .  Baldwin’s advertisements for political  23 Stephen College had been accused of libel by an Oxford University Doctor of Divinity (and friend to bishops) This high profile trial was considered a political turning point for Whigs, who shortly after began to lose much of their popular support. See James Sutherland, The Restoration Newspaper and its Development (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1986) 112. .  24 Hill, 199. 25 Sutherland,  13,  19.  51  pamphlets and broadsides appeared frequently in London newspapers during the 1680s , 26  and his name on this  broadside would have informed viewers that this was a Whiggish representation of the  ‘popish plots’.  One of the printers of The Solemn Mock Procession..., Nathaniel Ponder, bottom right of the engraving, nonconformist connections. nonconformist mercer,  (whose names is in the  see: Fig.  Ponder,  3)  also had  the son of a  specialized in publishing  27 nonconformist writings and literature.  To dissenters,  his reputation as a nonconformist printer would have been well—known,  thus signalling to viewers that the political  opinions this print advocated were of an anti—Catholic and anti-Anglican nature. prints,  then,  Before actually reading these  viewers could have understood  knowing the printer’s name)  (only by  that they represented at once  both an argument for the Duke’s exclusion and a criticism of the established church. Thus far I have outlined how the Cellier prints were of a particular genre of exclusionist representation which functioned to address nonconformist and Whig audiences.  I will now analyze how these genres contained  an implicit critique of the established church and how 26 Baldwin, Richard,” Dictionary of the Printers and Booksellers who were at work in England, Scotland and Ireland, 1557—1775, 1977 ed. 27 “Ponder, Nathaniel,” Dictionary. Ponder would have been well known to nonconformist audiences and readers of Puritanical literature as he was the original printer of John Bunyans Pilgrim’s Progress, a work so well—received that he produced three editions in 1678 alone.  52  this functioned to construct Cellier as part of the Anglican interest so feared by nonconformists. in this way,  Perceived  Cellier would be characterized as a danger  not just to Protestants, but specifically to local nonconformist government control. The association of Cellier with the Anglican elite was not arbitrary, precisely because of Cellier’s status as a midwife. of England,  Midwives,  licensed directly by the Church  could serve the interests of the established  church by maintaining control over such social issues as illegitimacy and abortion, while playing an important political role crimes)  (as legally recognized witnesses to such  in both ecclesiastical and civil courts.  It was  this authority of the established church over private secular matters of which nonconformists were so critical. Generally speaking,  the nonconformist challenge to  the authority of the Church of England in these prints took the form of either a direct association between the Anglican and the Catholic Churches,  or the Anglican  Church was represented in metaphorical terms reminiscent of the Catholic Church.  This first form of  representation is evident in The Popish.. Plot .  in image  ‘IX’.  Here,  1)  three criminals are represented  attempting to murder the Whig Justice Arnold. this,  (Fig.  the explanation informs us,  Following  a small image depicts  these same criminals destroying their  ‘Treasonable  53  Papers’ (number  after attempting the murder; while the next image ‘XI’)  represents one of these men delivering news  to the pope of their attempt. this print,  these pictures are not accompanied by a  specific textual description. of image number image:  Unlike other images in  ‘X’  In fact,  the description  does not even refer to the man in the  an Anglican parson who is supervising the conduct  of these criminals.  Thus the representation of this  Anglican parson is somewhat ambiguous.  The image is  followed by one of the pope who is also represented advising these same criminals.  The juxtaposition of  these images creates a reference to the similarity of the authority Churches.  (and tyranny)  of the Anglican and Catholic  As a result, both of these institutions are  accused, through this representation,  of working to the  same ends--the destruction of the Whigs Justice Arnold),  and by extension,  (represented by  the well-being of  nonconformists. This notion that there is little difference between the actions of those of the Anglican and Catholic Churches  (that both are indeed ‘popish’)  is also  established in The Solemn Mock Procession... In this image, Catholic  (Fig.  3)  although many of the figures are obviously  (such as the monks),  not all of the church  figures are representatives of the Catholic Church. example, the bishops in the middle row wear vestments  For  0)  -J  w o o  CD  I-  CD  1  CD  --  0  0  —  0  CD  o  CD  H-  I-’  0  CD  CD  Z  o  frj  CC)  Ci)  CD  o  -  ,-  CD  -  -  ‘.0  -  ‘—  H  CD  CDP3  •  CD P3 H ft  H  CD  CDH-$2$2 HCD 0ftHd Hi ES  ftb’ESES  Cui  CDESCUCD  b0QES  HICD H-H ctPiCDi ftftCU H-CDft C30MES CDES—CD C1M H-O I HMH-C) CD ESES’ ) P3 ft ftCDE”t3 OCDCDHC) 0  cu$2’-<  -Hi CD H0b frICDPJ II $2CD U MCD CDCD  CDCDOCD  W’-3  <1  ••  C) HCD ft ‘<  0  CD  H HCD  Li 3  II  CD  0  0 II Hft -<  ft  Pi  ES  ‘< CD  H  p3  ES  CD  13’  ft  0 Hi  H  p3  CD H  <  CD CD  ft 0  $2  H CD Hi CD H H CD  ft  CD P3  Q  CU  ‘t  HCD  ct  LQ  H-  b  2 Cl) CD C) II H-  p3  0  ft H-  Hft  ft  H13 CD  Hft CD  CD CD CD H ft CD Cl  p3  H C)  C) ES’  ES  pJ  LQ H HC)  )‘  ft J CD  HC)  Ht5  ES’  CD -1 CD CD  H  3  H HC)  H-  CD P3 ft  CD  ‘-a  •  CD  H CD 0  P3  ES’  HC)  F-’  P3  ft HC)  F-’ H-  0  CD  -  $2  I-’ P3 ES  ES  Li  Hi  ft  0  P3  ES’  H C)  C) ES’  CD  ES’  ft  0 Hi  C) H Hft HC) HCD  •  N) co  CD  H  ft ft CD  CU  ct CD  CU  CU II  ‘ti  CD CD  CD H CD  C) CD  CD  H-  D H-  0 H Hft F-  I-’ 0  Hi  ES CD N ft  CD  ES’  0  ft  ES’  HES  $2  CD  C) 0 3 ft H-  II Hft ‘-<  0  ct  HCD  ES  H HC) P3  :3  $2  ft CD  CD  M CD ‘ti M CD CD  Cl  ES  P3  ES  0  H CD H HL-Q H  0 Hi  HCD CD ci CD CD  ES’  CD  ft  P3 ft  3’  ft  HCD  <  HCs) ft  I-I  H) 0  3  0 J C) 0  F-’  P3  CD H  ES  CD  CD  iD’  ft  ES  H-  H CD P3 Hi Hi HH  ES  H C)  C) ES  CD  J  ft  0 Hi  Ct HC) 3  H3 CD ft Hft  CD  13’  ft  Ct 0  0  Q  H  0  ES’  CD  CD  ‘s’ H’ ES  ft  D’  p3  ft  CD CU  $2  H-  CD  ft  $2  H CD  C)  fri H1 H-  i CD  ft  H0 ES  P3 ft  ft  13  H CD CD CD  ‘t  H CD  ft HH HC) P3 I—’  p3  CD  p3  C)  Cui  CX)  N)  ES  •  CD H0  CD N C) H  CO ft 0 ‘ti  3  p-  b  ft  ES  CD  P3  H-  H H  P3  ‘tI  CD  -Q  H 0 H 0  ft 0  I-I  CD  $2  0 H  ES  H-  ‘-<  I-I  ct  CD  ‘-Q  U  H HC)  CD  Ct D  <  Cl  CD  H P3 ft  ES H-  P3  ES  CD CD  b  $2  P3  ES’  I-I HI  H I—’ CD CD  p3  C)  CU ft  ES  ft  C) H CU H-  HCD ft  H  0  0 3 C) 0 3 Hi  ES ft  CD C) CD  H  CD  ‘  ft  0  ft  CD Hi CD t-l CD  H  -.  Co ft HH H  H HCD  $2  CU  CD H  3  ‘  H  0  P3 Cl  CD  H  $2  CU H F-’  CD  HES ‘-Q CD  ‘  CD  ‘ti  ES’ 0  HCD  0 H)  Hi H 0 CU ft  Hi HII CD ft  CD  J  ft  0 3  ‘  H CD CD  CD  ES’ CD  •  Cl  0 P3  H  CU Y  CD  ‘t5  0  HCD  b’  ES’  0 i—’ HC)  ft  U  C)  0  $2 ct  0 Co CD  0  CU CD  CD  0  d  HCD  ES  C) P3  F-’ H-  ES  H  p3  H 0 C)  CD  ft  0 Hi  C) II Hft HC) P3 I—’  H CD  U  i-i H 0 CU ft  C)  )  CD  :  CD H 0  b  M  ‘  CD CD CD  CD H  P3 H  HC)  H  H-  ft  CD P3  CD  ft  -  H CD  0  ti  -  CU CD  CO  0  HCD  CD CD CD  ft  ft 0  CD Hi CD ii Co  CD  H Cl  Cl CD  0 CU  H  b’  ES’ CD  ft  0 Hi  0 ft ft 0  CD  3’  ft  P3 ft  ES  H0  ft  H CU ES P3  CD N  CD  3  ft  LQ  0  H Ct  H  CD  ‘tI  0  D  I-’ CD  b’  ES  ES tQ H HC)  1<  0 H ES  0 CD CD  ft  ft 0  ft H C) P3 H  3  H $2 CD  CD ft  0  P)  ‘IS  01  55  Many viewers would have been familiar with this reference to calendars because of the insistence of the Anglican Church during this period to print specific church holidays and saints’ birthdays in red letters in agrarian For nonconformists, this represented the  calendars.  unwanted expansion of the Churches temporal authority. Calendars were in common usage and such a reference would have been understood by nonconformists as representative of the Churches attempts to control the daily secular ° 3 affairs of all Protestants. ‘second birth’  In addition,  the term  in this verse referred to the more radical  nonconformist critique of the necessity of holy baptism. Indeed many dissenters rejected the notion that one had to be  ‘born again’; and Anabaptists believed baptism  should only be performed on those who had chosen,  at an  ’ 3 to commit one’s life to one’s faith.  Such  adult age,  references would have had an impact on dissenting communities wary that the rituals of the established church were representative of its asserted authority over all English subjects. Following the floats representing the Anglican establishment is an image of the pope, surrounded by more bishops. verse on the bishops’ 30 Thomas,  738—9.  31 Thomas, 197.  float,  enthroned and  After the previous satirical the image of the king  56  attempting to kiss the pope’s toe stepped on)  (and subsequently being  would not only have called into question the  nature of the Church of England’s temporal authority over English society, but also deemed the participation of the Church in political affairs inappropriate.  This image  could thus be interpreted as an allegorical representation of the power of the Church of England in particular the Anglican gentry) regarding exclusion. 32  over the monarch  This premise originated from the  Protestant notion that the church’s role was words of Luther)  one of  (in the  ‘caretaker of the souls’,  one of a powerful institution that politics.  (and  ‘interfered’  and not  in local  Such a message would have been especially  significant in London during the Exclusion Crisis, when the largely nonconformist London Corporation feared attempts by the Anglican elite to win back their local political authority. A similar although less overt criticism of the established Anglican Church is also found in The Happy Instruments...  (Fig.  5).  This image is constructed in a  hierarchical fashion, mocking the baroque visual language used in imagery of the Catholic Church during this period.  The Whig  ‘heroes’  of the plot are represented in  the glory usually used to depict heaven.  The Catholic  Church as anti-Christ is represented by the pope and 32 George,  5.  CD  CD  it  Di  it  it  ‘Q  H-  H H  Dl  H-,  0 it  H Cl  it 0  H-  ‘Q CD CO it  CO  CO  it  0  CD  HCD CO  Cl it  Di  CD CO  b  0  0  L  Cl CD CO C) ti H-  H0 i  it  Di  H Di  CD H  H Di  CD  <  H-  ‘Zj 0 CO Hit  CD  it  CD  LQ H-  CD N -  H-  HCO  HCO  ‘—3  •  Di N 0 t CO  Dl  Cl)  CD  ‘Q —  I”-)  •  HDl  H-  ‘i  —  ct  ‘C5 I-I Hi  0  it  H Di tS Dl it H0  it  H 0  N  d  ‘tI  •  •  •  HCO  C)  CD  ‘-a  HI  •  CO  H HC) Di  L.Q  0 H  CD  CD  ‘CI CI)  0  HCO  it  H-  —.  it 0  0  CD  it  0 H  CD  CO b ti ‘<  CD  0  it CD  Cl  CD ti  CO  H  Di  ti CD  HCO  C) CD H H HCD t-  I-b  -  HI  -  CD ii  i i  Di  Co  CD  •  CO 0  ‘C3 CD  H CD  Y  Di  ti  c  0  it 0  it I-I Di CO it  p  0  C) 0  0 H  Di H H  it  Di  it  F-’-  C) H Di H-  CD CO  Di it  II CO Di  HI-  it  <  <  CO  ti II ‘-<  CD  it  Cl  Di Cl  D  II Dl < CD  d  Cl  b  it CO  Di  Di I—b it CD CO  Di  H CD i LQ it  CD  CO it  -1 Ci II 0 it CD  HCO  ‘z5  0  HCO  H  0  Co  P)  CO  Di C) it H0  CD  it  H-  CD H H HCD I-  C)  CD  it  H HC) Dl  H-  C)  ct  H0 i  C) it  3  H  H Cl  C) 0  it CO  d M H-  CD CO CD  it  F-’-  Cl  ‘.p F-’ Di  Li  0 H  II C)  C)  CD  it  H  C)  C) HCO  H-  I Hit  C)  it  ‘t3 H HC) H-  H-  CD  it  d  U-i  •  ‘i H-  •  •  •  it CO  CD  CO it ti  HI  ‘-<  Di  CD  ‘-a  Hi  it  CD  H-  <  CD  HCO  CO  •  II C)  C)  Cl  I  CO CD I  0  it  H-  CD C)  CO  it 0  Di it  ICD  it  -  HCO  0  -  Di  0  CO  C)  Cl  ti Ii C) it CD  it  CO  0  C)  CD  it  -  CD  CD  CD  ‘.Q  Dl  H-  CO  -  H HCD ti  C) CD H  •  Di H  C)  HCl)  CD  )  J CD 1  H it HDi CY C) HDi HH CO H ‘-< CD  CO  CD  CD  it  0 H,  CD  it CO HCl  I 0  CO I  HCO it  0 i H 0 II  C)  0 i  -  it  0  CD ti CD  CD ‘-<  it  Dl it  it  H0  it  H-  H-  I-b  CD  Cl  ‘-<  H HCl) Cl  ‘t3  H-  HC)  -  CO  0 i  d H-  Di CO  CD CO  CO CD H  CD  J  it  HY CD  ti  CD CO C)  Cl  0  it  CO it CO  H-  0 ti  C) 0 i  i 0  1D ‘<  0 Cl  H-  ‘tj CD -‘I  HCO  3  it  ii H-  Cl  Cl  CO CD  Di Cl)  Hit  CD  <  CD C) ct H-  C—i-  Cl  Dl  Di  CO  •  it  Di  C)  HI-b H-  CO H-  CO  )  -  -  CO  it  it CD t-$  CD  it  0 it CD Cl) it Dl  0 I—b  CD  C)  0 H-  C)  CD  •  CO  Di  ‘-< ct CD II H-  b  ‘U t  -  Di H  II  LQ CD i CD  CD  0  CD  J  it  0 I-b  CD Dl Cl  ‘d ti CD CO  CD I-  CD  it  ti  it  0  ‘—3  ICD Di $2 CO  C)  H-  H-  ‘<  it  b  0  $2  H-  it  HCO  II C)  C)  C)  H  0  it  Di  C)  CD  it  0  j  0  it Di it H-  CO CD  CD  ‘1  ICD ‘C  H-  CD H H  C)  b ‘<  Cl  H  it  CO  i  J  ii H H  Di H  Di  ‘ZI  it 3 CD  CD  CD  it  Di Hi CO it  Di  it  Ct5 H 0  H-  -  çt CD II HDi ) CO  CO  CD  UJ II  Hit CD ‘1 Di H  H  Di  H ‘<  0  CO  H-  Di C-Q CD  H-  CD  it  Di it  it  Dl  CD  Cl  H-  CD  it  -,  HCO  Di  HC)  H  LC  0  it  CD CO  C)  CD H CD ICD  CD ti it  0  i 0  CO  it Di H-  0  C)  it  tH-  d  CD  it  H H Cl)  •  CO  it  H-  C)  H-  H  0  C) Di it  it  CD  H  0  I-I  0 i CO  II  H  CO  Di  t3  Cl  CD  Cl  CO Ii Iti 0  CD  II  Di  0  H H  l CD  q Cl)  Cl  Di  Di H CO  H-  Cl  Di II  c  CO  Di  C) 3  CO  ti CD CO  H, H-  —1  01  58  Cellier was of a larger group aiming to destroy Shaftesbury.  As unofficial leader of the Whig Party,  Shaftesbury’s religious and political opponents would generally have been Court Party Anglicans, who continued to stop the passage of the Exclusion Bill in the House of Lords.  Although Cellier herself was a practicing  Catholic, context,  her representation,  given this political  nonetheless affiliated her with the Anglican  threat to nonconformity. Further to this, ‘popish adversaries’ political enemies,  if one is to read the description as referring to Shaftesbury’s  Cellier in fact could be interpreted  as a facilitator for the Anglican destruction of Shaftesbury,  (he was in fact defeated by the Anglican  elite when the Exclusion Bill was thrown out in 1681)  .  As  a Catholic criminal who had acted on behalf of the Anglican interest, this representation of Cellier could thus function to unite Whiggish Broad Church and nonconformist audiences over the issue of exclusion. The image of Cellier was also used to blur distinctions between the institutional threats of Catholicism and Anglicanism in The Solemn Mock Procession...  (Fig.  3)  .  In this print,  Cellier is  represented on a pageant float with Anglican parsons ‘piebald’ --two coloured--habits, faced’  characters)  (in  representing their ‘two  who follow the Cavalier press censor,  59  Roger L’Estrange,  depicted here as a fiddler.  This image  associated Cellier’s Catholic criminal status with the Court Party views of L’Estrange and the alleged sympathy of Anglicans towards Catholics.  The placement of this  float in the front of the procession is also important • for it implied that the actions of Cellier other  ‘popish’  or treacheries.  figures)  (and these  would lead to subsequent crimes  After this representation of Cellier,  the recent political conflicts between the Country and Court Parties are referred to in the representation of a man,  his face painted black,  shown riding an ass  This was an old tradition of public ridicule  backwards.  which would have been known to local audiences of this 34 image and the original procession. image is introduced by the title: Parliament and Petitions”.  This satirical  “an Abhorrer of  Such a statement associated  this figure with the Court and high Anglican factions, who occupied the House of Lords and who had not supported the Exclusion Bill.  Cellier’s image, placed as an  introduction to this notion of Anglican rejection of Whig petitions to parliament again constructed a link between her actions Meal Tub)  (here shown taking the plot papers out of her  with the political views of the Anglican Court  Party.  Burke, Popular Culture in Early Modern Europe  (London:  Temple Smith,  1978)  188.  60  As the foregoing has indicated, the genres of print representing Cellier constructed her as a  ‘popish’ threat  for the purposes of addressing nonconformist and Whiggish viewers.  This construction of Cellier’s public image  used established visual conventions for the purposes of portraying her as a treasonous,  ‘popish’  Catholic,  while  deeming her part of a system of Anglican religious authority of which nonconformists were not only critical, but fearful.  Such a representation, within the context  of the Exclusion Crisis,  would condemn Cellier as a  political and religious danger to the very survival of the local nonconformist majority in the London Corporation.  61  CHAPTER THREE: “AND SO DID SHE SUITABLY MIDWIFE WORLD”:  [THE PLOT]  ‘POPISH MIDWIFERY’ AS A CRITIQUE OF THE PRZ.CTICE  In Chapter Two,  I demonstrated how Cellier’s  criminal persona was represented as which,  INTO THE  ‘popish’  in a manner  through the use of anti-Catholic rhetoric,  addressed Whig and nonconformists audiences. to this characterization,  however,  In addition  Cellier’s public  criminal image was also constructed through frequent references to her profession——midwifery. construction of Cellier as a  The  ‘popish midwife’  in these  prints would claim that midwifery was a criminal practice.  For although Cellier’s representation  ostensibly related to her alleged role in the Meal Tub Plot,  it was Cellier’s position as a midwife that became  the ultimate target of her representation in the popular press.  It is therefore the aim of this chapter to  analyze how,  within the context of these pro-exclusion  critiques of the established church,  the visual  representation of Cellier as criminal midwife would correspondingly function to criticize the midwifery profession itself.  To do this I shall demonstrate how  the printed images of Cellier served to associate her status as a midwife with her alleged criminal actions.  ‘popish’  and  62  There are two parallel issues which will be addressed in this analysis:  Firstly,  I will analyze how  this attack on midwifery in these exciusionist prints was part of the larger nonconformist critique of the Anglican Church’s involvement in secular affairs  (local politics,  for example) --an area over which licensed midwives (through the ecclesiastical and civil courts) had a religion-backed authority.  would have  The second issue is how  this specific political and religious representation of Cellier as  ‘popish midwife’  coincided with a new medical  discourse on midwifery--one which questioned the older forms of midwifery practiöe. While these two types of discourse--the political/religious on the one hand and the medical on the other-- functioned in different ways,  they all served  to change societal perceptions concerning childbirth. Representations of Cellier as  ‘popish midwife’  could  operate as an important means through which such perceptions could be questioned.  For,  although these  engravings constructed their political message in an attempt to convince nonconformists of the need for exclusion,  they would nonetheless have been visible to  many different London viewers through such venues coffee houses and bookshops.  Unlike medical texts on birth or  religious texts concerning the authority of the church, many of which were designed to address educated elites,  63  the prints representing Cellier were accessible to a variety of different social groups. contemporary,  In the words of one  the availability of these kinds of popular  prints was such that they “swarmed in ev’ry Street,  and  1 marched from Friend to Friend”.  then,  These engravings,  could make claims about midwifery for their viewers in a With their familiar  way that erudite texts could not. combination of both image and text,  these representations  of Cellier as midwife “were more imperative than writing,  [for]  [just]  they imposed meaning at one stroke,  2 without analyzing or diluting it”  I shall argue that it  was the popular representation of Cellier which successfully comprised both kinds of criticism of midwifery--the political/religious and the medical--at once, thus operating as a public condemnation of traditional midwifery. How could representations of Cellier as a  ‘criminal’  have functioned as a critique of traditional midwifery practice?  It has already been stated in Chapter Two that  Cellier’s representation was part of a traditional form of  ‘popish plot’  imagery which depicted events in order  to make exemplary statements about some  ‘truth’.  In  accordance with this form of representation Cellier was  Quoted in Tim Harris, London Crowds in the Reign of Charles II: Politics from the Restoration to the Exclusion Crisis (Cambridge: 1987) 98. 2 Roland Barthes, Mythologies,  3rd ed.  (London:  Paladin,  1973)  Propaganda and Cambridge UP,  110.  64  depicted in these prints in metaphorical terms which acted as  ‘double’  referents,  combining the two features  of Cellier’s persona-—her popish criminality and her midwifery profession.  The characterization of a person  through references to their profession was a conventional means of depictingwell-known individuals in the press during this period. 3  Such representations, while  obviously critical of the actions of a given historical persona,  could also operate to raise a framework of  issues regarding the societal persona’s profession, individual  ‘validity’  of that  or of the involvement of that  (and his or her profession)  in the political  events of the period. A particularly good example of the process whereby such references functioned in the identification of a particular personality is found in the representation of Roger L’Estrange in The Solemn Mock Procession... detail, Fig.  4).  (see  L’Estrange is represented on the same  pageant float as Cellier.  L’Estrange had been a staunch  Anglican and Cavalier supporter during the Civil War. After the Restoration, he was appointed by the king to the position of  ‘Surveyor of the Imprimerie’  of the press. 4  In this capacity,  and licenser  L’Estrange controlled  3 M.D. George, English Political Caricature to 1792: Propaganda (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1959) 12.  A Study of Opinion and  For a discussion of L’Estranges activities as press censor, see James Sutherland, The Restoration Newspaper and its Development (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1986) 1—2.  65  much of the government censorship over the English popular press.  Because of this,  L’Estrange was capable  not only of controlling the flow of news information regarding the local politics of London’s nonconformist)  city council,  (largely  but he could also,  as a key  supporter of the Court Party, maintain an Anglican authority over political matters. Crisis,  During the Exclusion  L’Estrange was one of the few pro-Anglican  journalists of the period who spoke out against Whig claims regarding exclusion. 5  Nonconformist printers were  therefore critical of his powerful role which allowed him to promote his rigidly pro-Anglican and Royalist views and he became a well-known Whig press,  (and disliked)  figure in the  often represented in a derisive and mocking  manner. In order to be recognizable to viewers as the official press censor and Anglican Court Party journalist,  L’Estrange was usually represented with the  ‘tools of his trade’. (detail, Fig. pen,  4),  In The Solemn Mock Procession...  for example, he is represented with a  ink and papers under his girdle  (this fact is also  reiterated in the description of the pageant float so as to inform viewers of his identity).  L’Estrange was also  known at this time for his talents as an accomplished  Sutherland, 2.  HII CD •  PS  P3 H) H)  M  H P3  CD CD C)  ‘1  CD  c  C)  iC  H3 H3  P3  PS H3 ft  5  H-  II 0 H CD  CO  Hft  .  p3  0  II Hft ‘<  HC)  H  ‘.Q  0 I-  -  HCD  ‘Ti 0 ‘CI  -  CD [-  Hft  —  CD  C) CD  CD H CD II CD  ft  P3  CD  ft  N CD  C) II Hft HC) H-  ft 0  CD  CD M  CD  Cl  H  :3  0  3  C)  Co  HH) CD I<  H-  P3 H  S  h  0 H  P3 CD  ft  0  C)  CD Cl  C)  CD  ç  ‘1 0  D  ft  -  II 0 H) CD CD CD H0 3  H  PS  H-  5  H-  C)  ‘.Q CD Cl  H H CD  P3  CD II  H)  I-  ‘Ti  0  CD  ft P3 H  Hct H-  H3  C) M  HH CD  0 C)  P3 CO CD  H-  -  P3 CD  H HCD  C) CD H  H)  0  ft P3 ft H0  CD  CD  M CD  ‘Ti  M CD  CD  ft  H0  H3  •  CD ft  H-  H-  H  <  P.)  P3 CD  -  CD  0  CD H H I  HCD  ft 0  0 ii  0  HCD  3  ct 0  0 H-,  CD  HCD  CO CD  P3  J  CD CD CD H0 3  0 H)  II  CI  CD  H-  H ‘<  H-  Cl  CD ‘CI 0  M 0  .Q  II CD  0  CD II  <  0  Hft <  0  P3 Ii ft  Cl  CD  C)  •  II Hft HC) PS H  C)  CD II CD  HCD ft CD  5  tI  0 3 H) 0  C)  CD p.) S ft  ‘.Q  P3  ‘Ti  J  ft  CD H-  :i  P3  HH) ft  H)  I t5 PS  ft  t  H-  C)  CD  ii CD CD CD 3 ft  CD  I-I  CO  r5  Cl) 1J  H-  tY  CD  0  HC)  M  0  —  C.)  •  1 H-  ID ct Co  0  H  H  3  P3  C) 0  H HC)  3  CD  -  P3 :3 .Q CD  L’l  CD ft  -  L-  C Cl)  J  Cl  3  CO  S  P3 ct ft CD  H  0 H Hft HC) P3  ft  Hft HC) HN CD l  C) II  CD  II  CD I CD  CD Hct  -  M  CD CD —  0  C)  CD  C) CD  P) CD  H0  3  I-  CD h CD II Cl)  CO  CD  ft  ‘t3 II CD  CD  HH p3  5  CD  P3  3  HI  H  -  CD  H-  H-  5  P)  CD 0  3  CD  0  M  0  P) C) ft H-  d  C)  P3  CD CD  p3  ft  I—’-  5  ‘1  H-  CD  H HC)  5  CD  C)  Cl)  :3  Q H HC) P3  0  II  CD  ft  H CD  5 ‘Ti  P3  CD  H) 0 I-  —.  Hft <  0  ft  PS  H  3  C)  0 H HCt H-  c d  3  P3  CO  0  H-  HQ  H  CD  Ia)  IC)  Ic  Iii  :3  P3  C)  H H-  0 H)  CD  S  I  I-h 0  0 ft J CD II  Hft  CD Cl  CD CD CD 0 C) HPS ft  0  CD H CD  CD  P.)  3  0  5  I’-3  H3  Cl)  p3  H-  HCO  0 H)  H0 3  d ft  CD Cl) C) II H-  Cl  CD  J  ft  •.  CD CD  CD  I lCD ‘ti I I-I IC,) HIc ft IH lCD 15 J 1 H-I I CD lo IC)  HCD  ft  I—h  0  ft  CD  ft  C) 0  CD  ft  HI  •  -  •  Ic I I•  lCD IH-  H-CD  ft  CD H-  0  -  C) CD  p3  Cl  -  o  Cl ft  CD  L  H H-  tY  0  CD iCD  Cl)  II  0 II ft CD  d  ‘t3  CD I  H-  Co  0 -h  ‘<  5 3 :3  HC)  ft 0  -  3 CD  ft  p3  H PS <  ‘Ti  -  ft 0  CD  PS t) H  CD  PS  Ift ‘< I I  3  ‘d  ft  II  C) 0  3  HC)  H  3  CD  ft  3  Cl  H-  CD  C) CD  I-  0  H)  H  CD II H)  0  ‘Ti  3  CD I I P3 CD  i.Q  PS  CD ct  Li  -  L-’  ft  P3  ft  H0  ft  C)  CD  ct  3  0  5  Cl  H P3 ‘< CD  ‘Ti  Hft  CD  ft H-  5 CD  Cl) 3  CD  p3 ft  H CD  3’ H-  Cl)  Ht.Q H-  0 II  C) H P3 CO CD  I  ‘1  CD  t3  HCD  0 H)  H:3  5  0 C)  1<  CD :3 H  0  ‘CI  P3 CD  II  CD  l H  H) H-  -  ‘<  0 I). H-  -  P3  p.) CD  3 ‘Q CD  ii p,  ct  ii CD  -  0 H)  ft P.) ft H0 3  ii CD CD CD  ‘CI  II CD  IHC) P3 H  5  lCD  I3  H  ‘Ti H CD  P3  Cl)  H 0 I-  -  11  H CD  i  Cl  H-  H  P3  CD CD  IF-3  10 IC) I  It  I 1i I  11—’ ‘CD  ‘0  H-I  CD PS ft  CD  H-  ‘-3  •  ‘t  •  i H-  1 I• I.  Ic  IH-  Iii Ic IC) 1(1) Ico  t 1 I  ft CD  CD CD CD  I-  CD ‘Ti  ft CD  0  P.) CD  CD  C)  CD  CD  P5  P5 3 l  CO ft  H-  <1  H C) H H3  H  P3  H-  o  CD CD  C) H  67  How midwifery constituted a major element of Cellier’s  ‘popish’  criminality is most evident in The  Solemn Mock Procession...  (Fig.  3)  .  this print bending over her Meal Tub, papers from inside  (see detail,  Fig.  procession represented by this image,  Cellier is shown in extracting the plot 4).  In the actual  the person playing  Cellier’s character would have performed the act of taking the papers from the Meal Tub during the whole parade,  reinforcing continually her treasonous behaviour  for the crowds.  In the print, the satirical verse below  her float refers to Cellier’s movements: ore ye Meal Tub shows her art”,  “Whilst midwife  implying that Cellier is  not only facilitating the creation of the plot, but that such actions are similar to those of a midwife assisting with childbirth.  That Cellier ‘midwifed’ the birth of  the plot is established by the presence of the open Meal Tub which here fulfills a  ‘birthing’  function reminiscent  of a woman’s womb. This birth metaphor,  given the changes occurring  within midwifery practice and to childbirth itself, by no means an arbitrary reference.  was  As Elizabeth Harvey  states in her discussion of the metaphorical references to childbirth and midwifery in Renaissance poetry of the period,  the use of the birth “metaphor signals the  beginnings of a cultural change,  both in the management  of childbirth itself and in the epistemological and  68  medical discourses surrounding the understanding of gestation and birth.” 6  Within the context of changing  perceptions about midwifery and birth, this image of Cellier and her Meal Tub represented an association of criminality directly with traditional midwifery. facilitator of the birth of the plot,  As  Cellier’s criminal  identity and midwife status were inseparable. The idea that Cellier  ‘midwifed’ the birth of the  plot is also evident in the other two prints. Popish...Plot print  (Fig.  1),  for example,  The  represents  Cellier in the process of being apprehended by Sir (on her left), who has found her pulling  William Wailer  plot papers from her Meal Tub in an attempt to burn them. The idea that Cellier’s criminal actions are related to the Meal Tub is also referred to in The Happy (Fig.  Instruments... holding papers,  5),  where Cellier is represented  the function of which is designated by  the commentary:  “To turn the plot against the  Presbyterians”.  These papers were those claimed to have  been found in the Meal Tub by Wailer,  thus here Cellier’s  actions are again associated with the Meal Tub. images,  In these  Cellier’s relationship with the Meal Tub is one  of facilitator; the Meal Tub,  she is aware of the secrets held within  and assists in attempting to bring them  6 Elizabeth D. Harvey, in her soon to be published Ventriloguized Voices: Theory and English Renaissance Texts (London: Routledge, 1992) 149.  Feminist  69  either to fruition  (as she is represented in The Happy  Instruments..., Fig. secret)  or to destruction  5)  in the Popish.  .  .Plot print  (Fig.  (so they remain 1)  .  This  facilitating role is similar to the role that a midwife would play during birth.  In fact,  in a print published  Cellier is depicted actually assisting the birth  in 1681,  of the pope from the Meal Tub while the devil oversees the proceedings. 7 inferred, then, during birth, ‘birth’  These metaphorical representations  that like midwives who assist women  Cellier was helping to bring forth the  of the Meal Tub Plot.  Cellier’s criminality as  well aá her midwifery were therefore represented in the three prints through a series of associations with the Meal Tub. This representation of midwifery was by necessity complex:  Cellier could not have been depicted at work  assisting in actual childbirth in the popular press, because of the societal taboos surrounding the public representation of birth and the naked human body during this period.  The representation of the human body for  other than religious purposes was considered immoral at 8 this time.  Until the end of the seventeenth century,  MM 1071, 1680, George, Catalogue of Prints and Drawings in the British Museum, Political and Personal Satires (London: Chiswick Press, 1870) 8 The representation of the human body in the popular press was governed by decorum during this period (as it is in contemporary newspapers today) . For an account of such conventions during the Civil War period, see Tamsyn Williams, “‘Magnetic Figures’: Polemical Prints of the English Revolution,” Renaissance Bodies: The Human Figure in English Culture, 1540—1660, ed. Lucy Gent, and Nigel Llewellyn (London: Reaktion Books, 1990) 86—110.  70  the process of childbirth itself was thought of as a private affair which took place in the presence of only the midwife and the new mother’s  9 ‘gossips’.  Men rarely  witnessed birth--apparently for reasons of propriety--and as a result the knowledge surrounding the process of childbirth was primarily shared among women. a midwifery manual of 1635,  Indeed,  in  Childbirth or the happy  deliveries of women,  the translator stated that he  “doubted this matter  [birth]  could be expressed in such  modest terms as are fit for the virginitie of pen and paper,  and the white sheets of.. .Child-bed”.  Nevertheless, he promised his audience that he would endeavour to “be as private and retired in expressing al passages in this kind as possible as he could”.’°  Given  the fact that representations of birth were still considered ‘improper’, the representation of Cellier as a midwife at work would have had to have been indirect. The question remains,  then:  could it have been  possible for contemporary viewers to perceive the metaphorical significance of Cellier with her Meal Tub?  ‘Gossips’ were women friends or relatives of the labouring woman who assisted with preparations for the birth. The term was derived from the original ‘god-siblings’ which referred to their function of witnessing the birth and subsequent baptism. It is interesting that by the seventeenth century (the same period when midwifery practice was being re—defined) the term had also come to describe a woman’s circle of female friends. The meaning of the term therefore changed when their role was no longer necessary, and came to be seen as intrusive. See Adrian Wilson, “Participant or Patient? Seventeenth Century Childbirth from the Mother’s Point of View,” Patients and Practitioners: Lay Perceptions of Medicine in Pre—Industrial Society, ed. Roy Porter (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1985) 134. 10 English translation of the original French text, Jaques Guillemeau, Childbirth or the happy deliveries of women, (London, 1635) quoted in Audrey Eccles, Obstetrics and Gynaecology in Tudor and Stuart England (London: Croom Helm, 1982) 381.  71  The representation of Cellier and the Meal Tub in The Solemn Mock Procession...  (detail, Fig.  4)  made the  metaphorical allusion that the Meal Tub was representative of a woman’s womb and the plot papers of a newborn.  While such an analogy may seem far fetched to  twentieth century viewers,  this reference would  nonetheless have been fathomable to seventeenth century audiences.  Popular perception of childbirth,  not only  among the general public but also among the learned medical elite,  recalled the Aristotelian notion that  women’s biological role in the reproduction of children 1 was passive.’  The woman’s womb received the active seed  of the man which then grew into a child.  In this sense,  women were not thought to biologically contribute to the formation of children, but instead were considered ‘vessels’  for reproduction.  The idea of woman as  ‘vessel’  was represented in midwifery manuals of the day. Expert Midwife of 1637  (Fig.  In The  8), the womb was depicted as  a round form with an opening at the top.’ 2  Neither was  such representation of the womb uncommon during this period; and given this perception of the womb, metaphorical link of the Meal Tub as  the  ‘birthing’ vessel  was therefore possible to make.  9.2  Maryanne Cline Horowitz, (1976): 183—213.  12 Jakob Rueff,  “Aristotle and Woman,” Journal of the History of Biology  The Expert Midwife  (London,  1637).  72  Of course,  it cannot be assumed that all viewers,  nonconformist or otherwise,  would have seen the Meal Tub  as directly referential of a woman’s womb.  Rather, the  image of the Meal Tub functioned as a visual reminder of Cellier’s identity as a midwife,  which further  represented her ability to facilitate the birth of a dangerous plot.  The Meal Tub could therefore create a  conceptual link between the practice of midwifery and the national threat of subsequently  ‘popery’  for its audience; and  became invested with the meaning that  Cellier had ‘midwifed’ the birth of the Meal Tub Plot into existence.  As a representation,  the Meal Tub  therefore functioned to link the dangerous threat of ‘popery’  (represented by the plot papers)  actions of an allegedly criminal midwife Cellier).  This association,  once that her  then,  with the (represented by  would have argued at  ‘popishness’--her link with the threat of  Anglicanism--provided the motive for her crimes,  while  her status as a midwife provided the means to bring to birth the  ‘popish plot’.  The notion that Cellier’s status as midwife was the means behind her ‘popish’  criminality was further  reinforced in Whig satirical pamphlets which claimed to document her crimes.  Such inexpensive political  pamphlets were widely read and circulated during this period,  and were used to inform readers of a particular  73  political issue or criminal,  in a format designed for  more in—depth discussion than regular news sheets This satirical textual representation of  allowed.  Cellier would have been familiar to informed viewers during the Exclusion Crisis. Cellier...  (1680)  was one such satirical text describing  Cellier’s second trial libel);  The Tryal of Elizabeth  (in which she was found guilty for  it described how local booksellers had purchased  copies of her  ‘libelous’ pamphlets:  so did she very suitably midwife it [her pamphlet] into the world with cheats and lies, sending for several booksellers to buy the worshipful copy and to everyone of them protesting on the faith of a Catholick woman, and the honour of her calling, that he had the maidenhead on it and was the first man she ever offered it to.’ 3 Such satire produced a dual basis for Cellier’s criminality,  asserting that her midwife status,  with her Catholic religion,  was the reason why she  committed treasonous actions. the Popes Letter  (1680)  combined  Maddam Celliers Answer to  was another satirical pamphlet,  this time printed in the form of a Cellier addressed to the pope.  (false)  letter from  In this pamphlet,  Cellier’s actions are described in terms referring to childbirth.  Says Cellier’s persona:  laboured with,  “what birth I have  of which if they helped to deliver me,  would be meritorious  4 (to every one)”.’  13 The Tryal of Elizabeth Cellier, Godbid for L.C., 1680) 1—2.  the Popish Midwife...  14 Maddam Celliers Answer to the Popes Letter  (London,  This satire  (London:  1680)  2.  Printed by A.  it  CD  N  v(D  -  CD  ,.  -  CD  CD  C)  01  ° C-I  -  C.)  -  ii:  CD  F  iiCCD  P)0 rD  CD  -  CD F—  DCD CDC  OZ  CD  I-  CD  0  Ciii  .  o  wi  IFO o  Hft  —  CD  Li  H-  Hi  CO  0  Li  CD  i Q  1 P3  —,  ft HP3 H H -<  CD  ft  ‘zJ  P3  Il  CD  .-  P3  C) 0 $2 CD CO  H ft si I-I P3 H  -  -  CO  p3  -  J 0  HHi CD  H2  0 Hi  CD  C)  ç  Ii  0 H  CD  ft  Hft  CD ft ‘<  CD  ft  1  P3  C) ft H0  H-  P3  0 1  Il  H  P3  H-  C)  II  0  CO 0  II ft P3 Hi  C) CD  CD d  ft  H-  ft  ‘Q  .  Hp3 3  Cl) ft 0  C) ç  H-  -  II  ‘.Q 0 < CD  PS  P5 H  CD  <  CD  Ii  I-I CD CO CD i ft P3 ft H0  ‘t5  Li CD  HCO  ft  D. H-  0 3 H ‘<  ft  0  •  0  H-  ft  3  H CD  0  CD  ft  Hi  0  HH Hft ‘-<  b  CO ft P3  CD  ft  ft 0  CD P3 ft  Ii  ft  Cl)  CD I-j 0  ‘Q  P3  P3  Il  CD  CD  HI-h Cl)  H-  p3  Hi  0  CO  P3 C) ft H0  CD  ft  ft  p3  ft  CD  C) H P3 H-  b  ‘-3  H  p3  CD  Il  CD  P3  H H HCD I-I  C)  0 Hi  P3 ‘. CD  H-  CD  ft  H-  I-  CD  CD ft  iX  ft 0  HHi CD Ii ‘<  H12  P3  -  CO  CO  CD  HCO  t3  0  -  0 Hi  CO  CD  HCO CO $i  Ii P3 ft CD  p3  CO CD  ‘-<  H  Q  H-  CO CD CD  0  ft  CD CO CD  ft  0 Hi  H0  ft  ft P3  II CD CO CD  d  II CD  CD  ‘-3  •  12  ft CD  Li CD CO CD  Li CD  1Y  ‘—3  H  p3  CD  II  Ii  ‘-Q CD  P3  H-  CD  ft  P3 ft  ft  ‘-<  Li  HHi  CD  H1  P3  H Hft ‘-<  p3  H-  H-  C)  -  HCO  0 ‘zI  ‘ti  -  CD CD  ft  1Y  CD  Hft  CD H H HCD II  C)  Hi  0  0  H-  CD C) ft  C) 0 t3  CD  ft  H Hi CD  Li  i 1 CD  CD Ii  ii ft  Hi  P3  ft H0  J  CD  ft  Hi  0  P3 H CO  H-  Ii H-  C)  0 Hi  Li  ft H0  p3  ft  Ii CD CO CD  CD CO CD 3 ft P3 ft H0 S  Ii  Ii CD  H P3 t-  0 ‘ti  CD  ft  H-  H  3  CO  C :i  CD  0  ft  ft Li P3 H  C) CD  HHi CD  ‘tI  Co P3 ft HLi HC) P3 H  HCO  ft  CO  CD H CD CO  CD ft  Z  H (3  0  •  Q p3  H-I-I CD  P3  P3 Co  Co  CO ft P3 ft  Ii  CD  CD  P3 ‘s  ft 0  CD 1  0  P3 H HN  P3  ft H-  C)  Hi  H-  H-  C)  Hi Li 0  Hi P3 Li  P3 CO  H Cii  12  ft CD  P3 C) C) 0  CD  tT  12  H  0  I lCD  1W  P3 CO  P3 i  0  CO  P3 ft CD  U) ft  P3  0 H Hft HC) HP3  P3  C)  CO  p3  ft  CD  Hi  H-  H-  P3  CD  H H-  CD  II  0  <  P3 i ft H  P3 t3  $2  CD  ft P3 H  0  CD  0  P3 CO  • •  •  Ii  H H HCD  CD  C)  CD ft  LJ H HN P3  Hi  0  H  ft 0  $2  Li CD Hi CD Li Li CD  P3 Co  CD H H HCD Li  C)  P3 ft  ft  I-h P3 C) ft  CD  ft  II H 0 1  CD  t5  HCO  ft J  ‘< P3  Q  i-3 Ii  II H-  1  CD  ‘-3  Hi  Li  ft H0  P3  ft  CO CD  CD  ‘-Cs  Ii CD  CO P3 ft H Li HC) P3 F-’  0 Hi  Li  I-h 0  P3 H  i ft H0  CD  C) 0  P3  Cl)  P3  Li 0 I-h CD CO CO H0  CO  -  P3 H  H-  H-  Ii  C)  P3  ft 0  C) CD  CD  Ii  CD Hi CD  II  H CO  ft  CD  CO  CD C) P3  •  H 0 ft  ‘t5  CD  ft  0 Hi  II ft  H-  CD  ft  H ft  CD Li  ‘-CI  D CD H  ft 0  CD Li  12  0 Li  Hi  -  HHi CD  H-  -  0 Hi  CD  0 H  II  Cl)  D  ft  H-  Q  CD  H P3 C)  ‘rj  CD Co  0  H  CD  ft  CD Li CD  0 Ii ft (0  C) 0  0 H HC)  ft  P3  C)  CD Ii  H CD  J H-  Hi  H  CD  CD II CO  0 ft  ‘d  CD  ft  Hi  0  0  H  C) CD ‘-CI ft  C) 0  CD  ft  Hi 0 Ii  CO H b H CD  0  ‘ti  Li CD CO  P3 CO  II  CD  H  C) CD H H  P3  ft  ft  CD  H P3 H  C)  75  also condemned the practice as criminal, thus functioning 7 as a critique of the profession.’ We might ask ourselves: relationship between  how was this conceptual  ‘popery’  and midwifery possible?  order to answer this question,  In  we can return to the idea  that Cellier’s representation as  ‘popish midwife’ was  part of a larger critique of the Anglican Church;  and  thus that her representation as a midwife would have further established her connection with the hierarchy of that institution. this period,  Licensed by the Anglican Church during  midwifery was perceived as an institutional  mechanism whereby the Church maintained a certain amount of social control.  As such,  midwives were perceived by  dissenting Protestant factions as part of a system Keith Thomas has described in the following terms: the Church’s tentacles stretched out through the ecclesiastical courts, [and] exercised a wide jurisdiction over marriage and divorce, defamation, the probate of wills nd every conceivable aspect of private morality.’° Indeed,  Cellier--as demonstrated in Chapter Two--was  often represented as playing an important role in affairs of the Anglican Church or Court Party elite. Popish.. .Plot  (Fig.  1,  image  ‘VI’)  In The  for example,  she is  shown attempting to kill the parliamentary opposition leader, 17 Harvey,  the Earl of Shaftesbury.  The representation of  149.  18 Keith Thomas, Religion and the Decline of Magic (London: 181.  Peregrine Books, 1978)  76  Cellier  ‘interfering’  in the local political affairs of  the Whigs is also evident in the next picture of this engraving  (image ‘VII),  where Cellier is caught attempting  to burn the Meal Tub Plot papers.  The  ‘explanation’  of  this image is specific in its description of these papers (supposedly written by Catholics):  they are details of a  ‘sham’ plot by Whigs to kill the king.  Those accused of  participating in this Whig conspiracy are some of the most important Whiggish politicians of the day: of Monmouth  the Duke  (the illegitimate Protestant son of Charles  Il--whom many Whigs regarded as the one suitable successor to the throne),  the Earl of Shaftesbury,  other local Whig politicians  (see Fig.  2)  .  and  As one who is  represented destroying Whig attempts of exclusion, Cellier is depicted interfering in the public affairs of the Whig politicians.  That Cellier was considered a  criminal who meddled in local politics is likewise made evident in the satirical text The Tryal of Elizabeth Cellier  (1680),  in which Cellier was described as one who  “talked abundantly,  more like a Midwife than such a  Politician and Stateswoman as she would be accounted”. This representation of Cellier as a midwife who interfered  (dangerously)  in the public issues of the  Exclusion Crisis did more than just condemn Cellier’s actions;  rather,  it questioned the previously assumed  authority of midwives under the Anglican licensing system  77  over issues concerning the well-being of local Such previous authority through  communities.  the licensing system had respectability and reliability as its ideals. . .Bastardy and infanticide were the concern of thecivil authorities as well as the ecclesiastical ones, so the midwife’s respectability was of considerable importance to a The restoration of moral well-organized parish. discipline after 1660 was prImarily the concern of the Church of England through the system of consistory courts and the machinery of licensing and visitation. 19 Given that the Church promoted and regulated particular codes of moral behaviour in English society, the representation of Cellier as a midwife who acted on the behalf of the Anglican elite would have confirmed nonconformist fears of the institutional threat that licensed midwifery posed for those outside of the established church. Popish.. .Plot  Indeed the title for The  (describing the plot as being “against our  religion and liberties”) Anglican Church  reiterates the notion that the  (and midwifery)  posed an institutional  threat to nonconformist groups which was not only religious,  but was also one that threatened the well  being of individual lives. This kind of representation of the institutional threat of licensed midwifery to dissenters is also represented in The Happy Instruments... this image,  (Fig.  5).  In  Cellier is represented as a facilitator and  19 David Harley, lgnorant Midwives——A Persistent Stereotype,” Society for the Social History of Medicine Bulletin 28 (1981) 7.  78  local plotter of Catholicism’s alleged plans to retake England.  If this print were read as a critical and  metaphorical reference to the hierarchical authority of the Anglican Church  (see: Chapter Two),  Cellier  (as one  who “turned the plot against the Presbyterians”)  was thus  depicted as part of a hierarchical institution which threatened the ability of nonconformists to participate in public life. The other local English facilitator to the plot shown in this image is Sir George Wakeman, physician to the Queen Catherine Braganza Portuguese Queen,  the royal (Charles II’s  a practicing Catholic).  holds a paper which reads: Poyson the King”.  Here Wakeman  “A Bill for 15000 pounds to  This image of Wakeman referred to a  controversy represented in the press during the period of the  ‘popish plots’.  Wakeman had been accused of  attempting to plot with the Queen to poison the King in order to re-instate Catholicism in England. supported the Court Party point of view,  As Wakeman  he came under  suspicion in the Whig press for such plotting. 20 That Wakeman was accused of using his position as royal physician to knowingly administer poisons to the king, would have reflected a general societal suspicion that physicians were costly theoreticians of medicine, almost  ‘secret knowledge’  20 John Kenyon,  The Popish Plot  on the subject  (London:  Heinemann,  1972)  52.  whose  (much of their  79  work was conducted in Latin and as such could be read only by the educated elites)  offered little in the way of  real practical medical advice or assistance. ’ 2  The fact  that Wakeman was so readily accused of high treason attests to a deeply felt mistrust of the traditional profession of  ‘physic’  which-—in the words of Nicholas  Culpeper the London apothecary and man-midwife--consisted of “jugling and knavery” . 22  Cellier’s representation  alongside that of Wakeman, the untrustworthy physician to the Catholic Queen,  would clearly have associated  midwifery further with the traditional profession of Further to this,  ‘jugling and knavery’  of the  ‘physic’.  the representation of midwifery  with the authority of the Church and the hierarchical and elite profession of ‘physic’ within this image represented midwifery practice as part of a hierarchical and outmoded social system, and. knavery’  which relied on the  ‘jugling  of physicians and the Anglican Church  bishops for the maintenance of social control. But if Cellier’s representation as a midwife would have signalled for nonconformists the unwanted authority of the Church over secular matters,  what was at stake in  the nonconformist critique of midwifery?  21 Irvine Loudon, Medical Care and the General Practitioner, Clarendon Press, 1986) 19—20.  1750—1850  22 See Culpepers full quote and my discussion on pages 2—3 above.  (Oxford:  80  Nonconformists had long questioned the imposed authority of the Church over a variety of domestic and private matters through licensed midwifery. 23  This  Church licensing system required that midwives be members of the Anglican Church and have the testimonials of a combination of clergymen, patients and medical practitioners.  The Church,  been interested in the as such,  in fact,  hardly seems to have  ‘medical’ capabilities of midwives  and midwives usually underwent an informal  apprenticeship under the supervision of another licensed midwife.  Instead, the Church required that midwives have  some form of instruction in baptism, the local clergyman.  usually taught by  The role of midwives included:  ensuring baptism according to Anglican rites should the mother or child die during childbirth; the supervision of the Anglican churching ritual;  and the  ‘laying out’  the dead in the required Anglican fashion. 24  of  The  importance of the midwife’s function is emphasized by one recent historian:  “This very varied activity could not  but give the midwife an important social role.  She  brought to birth and nursed a number of the inhabitants; she also attended to the laying out of the dead”, such,  as Gelis continues,  and as  “the midwife held both ends of  23 The English theologian Richard Hooker in his Of the lawes of ecclesiastical politie (a defense, printed in 1593—97, of the reformed Church of England against Puritan attacks) wrote extensively on the necessity of lay baptism, especially by women. See Richard Hooker, Of the lawes of ecclesiastical politie, ed. Georges Edelen (Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard UP, 1977) 24 For a description of the various roles taken on by midwives,  see Harley,  6—9.  81  the thread of life”. 25  Midwives therefore had a Church-  backed authority on a number of matters which could touch the lives of many within a given community.  In addition,  midwives also played an important role in civil and ecclesiastical courts as witnesses in illegitimacy cases. There are two reasons for this:  Firstly,  civil  authorities needed to know who was to pay for the child’s welfare; and secondly ecclesiastical authorities were interested in ensuring that the father of an illegitimate child do penance. 26  The midwife’s ability to assess and  establish things such as legitimacy and virginity,  were  thus important elements of the Church’s practice of social control through the ecclesiastical courts. The nonconformist critique of the Church’s maintenance of social control through such devices as licensed midwifery is probably most explicit in The Solemn Mock Procession...  (Fig.  3)  .  Here Cellier is not  only represented committing a crime in terms related to midwifery practice, but her image is associated with other  (critical)  authority.  representations of the Church’s  As already demonstrated in Chapter Two,  The  Solemn Mock Procession... was a complex critique of the Church’s authority over secular matters. pageant,  for example,  The fifth  represented bishops who are  25 Jacques Gelis, The History of Childbirth, trans. Rosemary Morris Press, 1991) 110. 26 Harley,  8.  (Oxford:  Polity  82  described in the satirical text below,  saying:  kings shall dread owr Thunder and lie still”.  “And  This image  could be interpreted as a criticism of the Anglican elites and their interference in local politics.  The  following pageant also criticized the authority of the Anglican Church with regard to baptism the text as  ‘second birth’)  .  (referred to in  This reference to baptism,  as a general nonconformist critique of the ritual,  also  operated indirectly to question what had previously been considered an important part of the midwife’s religious function at birth baptism).  (to perform emergency rites of  Within the context of this engraving,  midwifery was thus represented as part of a system of religious authority,  deemed by nonconformists as  unnecessary and ‘superstitious’.  This criticism of  midwifery in the Cellier prints thus coincided with and was representative of a larger process whereby nonconformists questioned the necessity for licensed midwifery. When it came to criticizing the authority of the Church’s hold on midwifery,  the nonconformist critique of  the established church manifested itself in a criticism of the various religious roles and actions of midwives themselves.  The institutional rituals of churching and  lay baptism in which midwives participated,  for example,  were considered ‘popish’ by dissenters for they were  83  remindful of the rituals of the medieval Catholic 27 Church.  In the ritual of churching a midwife escorted  the new mother  (dressed in a white veil), to church,  where the minister blessed her and welcomed her back into the holy community by reciting a particular psalm, often Psalm 121) •28  (most  Many nonconformists viewed this as  “one of the most obnoxious Popish survivals of the 29 Anglican Church”.  It was even claimed that it  “breedeth and nourisheth many superstitious opinions in the simple people’s hearts;  as that the woman which hath  ° 3 born a child is unclean and unholy”.  The  ‘popish’  rituals of the Anglican Church were therefore denigrated by dissenters who deemed such rituals a part of popular ‘superstition’.  The use of birth girdles,  for example,  (which imitated the Virgin Mary who was believed to have worn a birth girdle during the birth of Christ),  as well  as the chanting of charms and prayers which--according to Thomas——were “all common features of the country midwife’s repertoire”, 31 Protestant groups.  27 Thomas,  were rejected by nonconformist As late as the early eighteenth  42.  28 Many Puritans believed Psalm 121 (which would have been recited by the minister In the words of during the churching ceremony) encouraged superstitious’ beliefs. the ordinary women are hardly brought to look upon churching one contemporary: otherwise than as a charm to prevent witchcraft, and think that grass will hardly ever grow where they tread before they are churched.” G.L. Kittredge, Witchcraft in 1929, reprint 1956) quoted in Thomas, 43. Old and New England (New York: 29 Thomas, 30  j  42.  Canne, A Necessitie of Separation  31 Thomas,  222.  (1634)  quoted in Thomas,  65.  84  century,  one nonconformist writer warned that midwives  and new mothers were not to use: Mesures of our Lady,  “any Girdels,  Purses,  or such other Superstitious Things,  to be occupied about the Woman while she laboureth,  to  make her beleve to have the better Spede by it”. 32  These  various rituals were--in the minds of those who objected to them--the responsibility of midwives,  and the  nonconformist challenge to such rituals led to the condemnation of the midwives who practised them. Given the critical stance of many dissenting groups towards the religious functions of midwifery,  Cellier’s  representation in a larger nonconformist critique of the Anglican Church worked to associate not only her  ‘popish’  criminality with her midwifery profession, but such a representation also questioned the professional legitimacy and necessity of that practice. hand,  On the one  Cellier’s status as a midwife in this specific  critique of the Anglican political elite objected to the fact that midwifery had become part of the secular authority of the Church—-a mechanism of social control that nonconformists wanted to eliminate from the premise of that institution. representation as a association  At the same time, however, ‘popish midwife’,  (for example,  her  because of her  The Solemn Mock Procession...,  32 Burnet in Thomas Forbes, The Midwife and the Witch 1966) 125.  (New Haven, London:  Yale UP,  85  Fig.  3)  Church,  with the rituals and authority of the Anglican also condemned the religious function of the  practice itself. ‘popish midwife’  The representation of Cellier as linked the threat of  ‘popery’ with the  institutional authority of midwifery over secular affairs.  The coupling of the term ‘popish’  profession of midwifery,  then,  with the  was not only a critique of  the authority of the established church over temporal matters through the licensing of midwifery, but such a representation of midwifery as the necessity of midwives per their  ‘superstitious’  ‘popish’ Se,  also questioned  dismissing them for  religious functions.  This criticism of traditional midwifery practice as one which encouraged ‘superstition’ was also used by medical practitioners interested in promoting their ‘scientific’  ability to supervise childbirth.  The  previous practices of midwives came to represent the ‘ignorance’—-so it was argued--of the women that performed them.  In the words of one doctor,  midwifery manual of 1698,  in a  it was his intention to:  correct the frequent mistake of most midwives, who resting too boldly upon the common way of delivering women, neglect all the wholesome and profitable rules of the art.. which concern the anatomical parts of the body. 3 Increasingly, this kind of attitude became characteristic of how the medical profession perceived midwives. The Complete Midwifes Practice Enlarged  (London,  1698) A3.  Such  86  midwifery manuals would define midwifery as a medical practice,  the knowledge of which,  these manuals argued,  was to be obtained through reading and the analysis of anatomy.  In these manuals, women were considered  ignorant,  not because they did not know how to assist in  deliveries, but because they lacked the kind of knowledge these manuals  (and their doctor authors)  promoted--ie. a  knowledge based on reading which was combined with the visual analysis of anatomical illustrations.  Thus,  in  the words of Ann Dally: The power of the doctors as experts was not the power to heal or to demonstrate their knowledge: it was the power to give the appearance of knowing, therefore to judge. The doctors gained in stature not because of what they could do but because they could name, describe and explain. 34 Medical knowledge, literacy,  therefore, became linked to sight,  and intellectual cognition. 35  What the format  of these anatomical images did not represent was the older form of midwifery knowledge which had previously been learned orally between women midwives on an apprenticeship basis. condemned as a  The fact that Cellier was  ‘popish midwife’ through her  representation would have reinforced ‘popish’  (because the term  could be used to denigrate ritualistic practices  Dr. Ann Dally, Women Under the Knife, A History of Surgery (London: Radius, 1991) 67.  Hutchinson  L.J. Jordanova, ‘Gender, Generation and Science: William Hunter’s Obstetrical Atlas,’ William Hunter and the Eighteenth Century Medical World, ed. W.F. Bynum and Cambridge UP, 1985) 401. Roy Porter (Cambridge:  N) C)  z  0  0  o’  it CD  P3  H  Si  i-s CD Q  CD  it  <  b’  -  i CO  P3  CD  C)  <  HC) H-  CO  ‘<  H’  P3  it I—’  ‘t3  CD  H-  ‘t3  it  it H-  it  CO  P3  HCO  it  CO  C  ‘t3  tY CD CD  Cl  p3  CO  P3  11  CD ‘-<  ‘  it  CD  CD  0 i-s  CO  CO  HH H i CD  CO CD  C  HP3  it 0  Cl  CD  0 Cl  <  CO  b’  1-5  CD  it  C Si  0  CD  ‘Q  LI  CO Si  LI  CD  ‘  CD  b  it  C 1-h  it CO  CD  P.) 1-5  CD  it  it C  it  Hi it  P3  H CD  •  c5  C  it J CD H1-5  C  CO  H  C) p3 H’  P3 it CD  P3 H H  H-  ‘tI  CD  3  C  it  Cl  CD  C  P3 H H  it  C  Cl  p3  CO  CD II P3 it H0  0  H  P3  C)  H-  it -5 CD  CD  CD I-5  ‘  it  Cl  p3  it HC  CD  CD  H  ‘  LQ  P3  51  CO  P3 H H C  CD  ‘-<  CD  CO  P3  ct  C  CD  ii  CD  it CD  Si  51  HC) H-  CD  -5  CD Q  C) y’  H-  t CD  Si  CD CO C)  II  M  C)  J  si  Si  C C  U)  CO  it  U)  •  H-  P3  0  Cl  it  it  ‘ti  it CD  it  P3  P3  H-  CO  HP3  C)  CO H-  ‘<  y  C Hi  tQ CD  H CD  H  C  C)  CD II CD  it  b Ci  it HC i CO  ‘ti  II CD CO C) 1-5 H-  ‘ti  Cl) CD  CD  it  51  CO CD  CD  ‘t5  51 HCO  Cl  0 it J’ CD II  CD  J  it  C  CD C) p3 11 HCD CO  ‘  it  C  ‘t3  •  CO  Cl HC) Cu it H0  CD  Cl  CD  ‘1 HtY  C)  CD Cl  II CD CO  Cl  5  P3  H-  Cl  p3  CO  LI  CD  Cl  Cl HCO 0 LI  P3 H’  it CD LI  H-  i C CO CD Cl  ‘Q  H-  P3  Cl  CO  J ‘-< CO HC) HU  ‘tI  ‘•  ‘<  P3 H Ct  CD  CD I-I ‘-<  1  CD  it  Cl  P3  <  C)  LI P3  P3 II HCO it C C)  CD  it  C Hi  CO  Cl  CD  CD  i  HC) P3 H  Cl  CD  CD  it  Cl  CD  <  Cl)  CO HC) HP3  <  ‘  ‘d  -  Hi CD CD CO  HLQ  ‘  C II  Ci)  l  0  CD  I CO Si II L1  II  t)’ CD  P3 I-S  t)  -  Cl ‘  CO  HC) I-’P3 i  (‘2  ‘<  CD 1-5  CD Hit  CD  CD  CD  HC) H-  Cl  CD  Hi  ()  CD  Q  M  p3  C)  CD <  it  CD  Si  In  P3  C)  CD  Ui  CO  CD  H-  CD  II  ‘-5  P3  C)  C) it J CD  P3  CO  H H <  P3  CO  C)  CD LI CO  it Hit HC  F5 I—5 P3  51  CO CD  H HC) CD  Hit HC i P3 H’  51  P3  1-5  it  CD  ‘  it  Hi  ‘  C  CO  1-5  Si  H-  CO  1<  it  CD  C)  it  H  P3  1  CD  i t  H-  P3  CD  )  C)  :3 CD  C  1-5 CO CD CO  Si  H-  C I-S H-  H-  HCO it  1-5  Cl HCO C) C  C  CD  Si  C) H’  CD  C Si  P3 H it  Cl)  -  I—S  CD H H HCD  C)  •  HC) P3 H  Cl  CD  Cl  P3  CO I I  it HC  p3  CD  51  C) C  Cl  I-5 CD H P3 it CD  it  Si  P3 II ) it (I)  CD  CO  ti Si  it  CD  CD  1  it J  0 H-,  CD CO  C)  )  it II  CO CD  LQ  I-I CD H H-  C H Hit HC) P3 H  HC  ‘  i  it P3 it HC  1 CD CO CD  I CD  CO H-  H P3 LI  CD  Ci)  CD  it  C) P3 I Hit it H-C H-, C)  ‘-Q it CD CD  H-  it  Cl  P3  I-I  CD  •  CD  HHi CD  H51  CD H-  CD  it  i it HH  it HC)  C)  II P3  it D’ CD  LI iHCD CO  C)  it HC  P3  C) Si Cl)  C)  P3  HCO  it  -  CD II ‘-<  ‘tS  ‘tJ C  Hi  C  it Hit HC  CO  CD ii  Si  U) ‘ti  P3 it C) J I-’ Ct) CO CO  Cl)  ‘  it  C Hi  II CD CO Si I—’ it  CD  it  Cl  CD  CD ‘1  Cl  CO H-  C) 0  -s CD  P3  Cl  CD  I it  CD  II CD CO  ICD  ‘Ci  P3 H’ CO  H-  C) H-  CD -5  ‘  0 it  CD  it  51  P3  H H HCD -5  CD  C)  C Hi  CO  P3 C) it H C  CD  t  -  H  1 H-  -  H C it  •  •  HCO  C  CD  ‘  F-3  H-  —  CD  C  it H-  Cl Si C) P3  CD  I--S  Hi  C  CD CD 51  H-  CD  LI  CD  CD CO  H-  51  H-  P3 it  it  it  CD  II  P3  HC) P3 H  Cl  CD  CD  J  it  -  CO  Si  it HC  H-  CD I--S CO it  Si  CO  -  P3  CO  co —.1  CD  0-  Ct  0-  CD  Ct  0  0  0  p.  P’ 0  -0  OCt  00  0  •  Co  C) 3  P3 ft H-  HC)  CD  CD  Cl  ft  Hi  l-  0  HCl  Cl  Co  H-  ft  ‘  CD  II  CD Hi 0  I-I  ft D CD  Q  CD l-  CD  ‘ti  0  H-’ C) HP3  ft  it  H H-  ‘ti II P5 C)  Ps H  HC)  CD  0 Hi  CD P3 Co  II  P3  H-  0  H-  ft  H P3  ‘-Q  CD  II  CD  D  ft  II Co CD CD  P3 H H  0 Hi  H CD 2 Q CD  3 0  0 H)  PS  CD  ft  0  ft  H3  Co H P3 it CD  CD  0  H  <  ‘<  CD  0  it 0  HCo CD  CD  Li  Ps  HH  I-I  P3  Co  tS CD C) CD Co  it  j  0  t fr P3  P3  C)  H-  Q  01  ID  Itirt  p, 0  Co I 0  3  P5  Io  10 0-  iw  Co  ft  H  0  ‘i  •  Li-  P5  PS 3 Co  Co HC) H-  ‘<  ‘tI  ‘-<  tY  P3 ft H0  H  CD  II  II  CD H-  J  ft  Q  I-I  HCD Co  M  CD C) P3  0 it  P5 ‘ti  Cl  3  P3  H-  Co  CD  ft  i ‘-Q Co ft  0  P3  Co ft CD Cl  H-  CD  CD Co  l  H  P3  <  H-  I-  Co  H 0 C  P3  CD  Li-  it  P1  D  ft  ft  3  CD  H-  CD  HCO  ft  0 3  M  iQ CD  Co  ‘-<  P3  1  P5  Co  0  i-  CD 11 CD 3 ft  I-li  CO  HQ CD II CD  HHi  0  C)  CD 0 II CD ft HC)  ft  C)  CD  <  P3  0  it  P  CD  C) H P3 H-  HC) HP3 3 Co  Co  ‘<  FC5  CD  H  I—  D  0.  ft H) ‘<ft  ctCD  H-  ft Co  CO  3’tY’  CD Cit  0Co 0 I—I ‘tIH-i Co CDHP3 H-CoQft0 CDft HOCDCD C)Ct.—..HHl Coft 0J < P3•CD HC) ‘<  M  CoCo CD ft P3C1 CoF-’P3< P3ftCDCD Cl P3CoftP)  3ft  Ob’CDHH-H MOP3CDftPS  CD  H0CDF-. ‘-<H-L.Q0  H-Coft  itFCDft •CDCDCDHC) C) H-CoCl P3CD —JClCD P3H• P3  ctP3 H-D OP3H-ftH-3’C)  ‘t3ctCo.YCoHCD•CD 0ftH<ftft HiH-< 00 CDCDftP30 CoCDCoH-C)’tI Co H,Q II  P3.r)  dH-CDH-t-1 OtS’Z5COCD’<CD C)itCDfrCoCD PiCDHCD ftCOt3C)H0 tCD<H-3 iQ CDCo  •  H)  0  CD C) P3 M HCD Co  0 ft  P3  1  Co CD  P3 C) C)  CD  C)  P3 C) ft H-  I-  d  -  CD C) P5 ii HCD Co  0 ft  ‘t3  P3  0 Hi  ft HC)  H-  II  C)  h  0 II P5  C) 0 3 ft CD  1  3  P3  5  5  Co HC) H-  <  ‘tI  CD  0  I-I 3 Cl CD CD D.  •  Co  P3 3  H-  ‘< Co HC)  Hft  Cl H5 -Q  Co it P3  P3 H  CD ,.Q  0 H  P3 Co  3 HN CD $1  0  t.Q  C)  II CD  CD Co  ft HC)  C)  P3  I-  ‘C5  CD H1  ft  -Q  H3  <  P3  H-  CD 1  0 Co  CD Co it  II  ft CD  H-  Co CO H-  CD  0 Hi  1  ‘tI  3  CD  CD C) P3  b  H CD  CD  ft  C) H HCD  ‘-<  ft  H  P3  CD  Co  H CD Co  P3  0 ii  Hi  si it  CO I I  P3  H-  C)  H-  CO  D  ‘t3  CD C) Ps ii HCD Co  P5 ‘t$ 0 ft 0 Hi  Cl ft J P5 ft  3  Ps  CD 0 3 Co  iX  M  Co  0 ft  b’  PS Co  II ‘-<  :i ft  CD  C)  ft CD CD 3 Ct  CD  <  CD  Co  (D  ct  PS Co  M  0  CD  Co P3  CD  ft  0 H)  C)  Q.  F-’-  Q  Hct ‘<  CD P3  1  3  H-  0  -  Cl si ii H3 ‘Q  C) P3 Co CD  CD  it  ‘<  PS Co H3 ‘-Q H  CD  II  C)  H3  P5 Co  HCo  •  I-  Co CD II < HC) CD Co  F-  P3 Co  H-  1<  d  Co CD  P3  CD C)  tEl  •  H  H)  Co Co  C) CD  C)  Co  Co  PS  H  P3  0 tt  3  Co  P3  CO Hi LQ  HC) CD  ft  P3 :3 Cl  Co  3  CD 0  1Q  I-  Co i  CD  J  ft  0 Hi ft CD  Co  PS  Hft  C) 0 Co ft H  Co 0  ‘1 CD  CD  Co HC) H‘<  CD P3 H ft  Co  CD Co  H  CD  it 3  0 Hi  <  P3  CD Cl  H  H  ‘z3 ‘d  Co  0  Co  CD  H-  CD C) P5  0 çt  PS  ‘tI  P5 H  C)  H-  CD  ft tY CD  ft  b  ‘  Ift Co  ‘ti P3  Ij  ft CD  0  C)  -  II  CD  H CD Co Co  -  CD H-1  j  it  H-,  0  II P5 C) it H C) CD Co  CD  ft  aD  89  One of the areas in which this rivalry expressed itself,  and where both surgeons and apothecaries asserted  their medical authority, childbirth.  was the supervision of  Supervision of childbirth was still a  private contract between practitioner and patient,  and--  if one attended the births of the wealthy--it could also be quite lucrative.  For apothecaries and surgeons eager  to enter general practice,  attending a successful birth  was also a method by which one could become the regular doctor of a particular family.  Birth was therefore one  way in which one could promote one’s skills as a family 38 practitioner.  At first,  the idea of having a  ‘man  midwife’--as they were called--became fashionable amongst the wealthy. 39  Because most  ‘men-midwives’ were usually  surgeons or apothecaries, physicians soon felt, however, that men-midwives posed a potential threat to their own practices and clientele.  But the claims to medical  knowledge of these various practitioners by no means led directly to new ‘scientific’ developments in the practice.  As Audrey Eccles points out with regard to the  midwifery books produced by medical practitioners during this period: Especially on the subjects of conception, sexuality, pregnancy and menstruation. . . it is often impossible Jean Donnison, Midwives and Medical Men: A History of Inter—Professional Rivalries and Women’s Rights (New York: Schocken Books, 1977) 37. Adrian Wilson, Porter, 342.  “William Hunter and the Varieties of Man—Midwifery,” ed. Bynum and  90 to tell whether a scientific ‘fact’ has passed into common knowledge and become a generally received opinion, or an existing popular belief or practice has been rationalised and auhenticated by giving it a ‘scientific’ explanation. 4 Indeed,  from a twentieth century point of view, neither  the oral knowledge of midwives,  nor the written knowledge  of medical practitioners seems to have been particularly ‘better’ than the other. knowledge  Rather the one form of  (based on the study of anatomy and texts)  transform and eventually replace the other.  would  Such  attempts by men practitioners to take over the supervision of childbirth from their women midwife counterparts did not go unnoticed by the midwives themselves.  Indeed in 1688,  Cellier herself wrote,  in an  open letter to an anonymous doctor: I hope, Doctor... [you] will deter. . . from pretending to teach us Midwifery, especially such as confess they have never delivered Women in their Lives, and being asked What they would do in such a Case? reply they have not yet studied it, but will when occasion serves; This is something to the purpose I must confess, Doctor: But I doubt it will not satisfy the Women of this Age, who are so sensible and impatient of their Pain, that few of them will be prevailed with to bear it, in Complement to thern Doctor, while he fetches his Book, studies the Case, and teaches the Midwife to perform her work, which she hopes may be done before he comes. ’ 4 This process of re—education of women midwives would have grave repercussions for the older practice,  for not only  would midwifery qualifications change, but the assumed 40 Modes, 33. 41 Elizabeth Cellier (written Celleor), To Dr.———An Answer to His Queries, the Colledg for Midwives (London, 1688) 6—7.  concerning  91  primary care givers of childbirth would no longer necessarily be women.  The transformation of midwifery  knowledge would eventually result in the marginalization of women from the practice.  In a recent historical study  on the role of women in midwifery,  Harley points out  that: The numbers of. . .women. . . involved in midwifery appears to decline sharply during the eighteenth century and the rise of the men-midwives’ practice amongst the middle classes may well have been reinforced by new attitudes towars the activities suitable for middle class women. 4 As I have attempted to demonstrate, the seventeenth century term ‘popish’ used by Nicholas Culpeper Directory for Midwives,  (in his  166O) to describe the  traditional practice of midwives was a very specific yet complex criticism of what traditional midwifery practice had come to represent in the eyes of both nonconformist groups and the medical elite. ‘popish midwife’  as  ‘midwifery’  Cellier’s representation  demonstrated the dangers of a  licensed by the Anglican Church,  while it  simultaneously served to associate her criminality with the  ‘popish’  practice.  ignorance of the previous midwifery  Cellier’s representation as  ‘popish midwife’,  constructed through a complex series of associations, was therefore one part of an ongoing process whereby 42 Harley,  9.  See page 2,  above.  92  midwifery was redefined during the seventeenth century. This process would involve the re-evaluation of previous societal perceptions of childbirth and the assumed role of midwives themselves.  This criticism of the older  practice would manifest itself through a variety of discourses--political,  religious and medical--and was  thus not merely the result of  ‘scientific development’  in  medicine as has been previously claimed in medical 44 histories.  Indeed,  Cellier’s representation attests to  the complex and contradictory nature of the process whereby such changes to previous perceptions of childbirth and its supervision took place. The representation of Cellier then,  although  primarily political and religious in motivation,  would  also have served to criticize traditional midwifery. Within the nonconformist critique of the Anglican establishment,  the criticism of Cellier as  ‘popish’  functioned to question the hierarchical authority of the Church over secular matters.  Midwives,  previously been “deemed competent,  who had  and even urged to be  familiar with the rituals” of the Anglican Church,  now  stood “at the borderline between different groups who contended for the salvation of the patient:  the clergy  See, for example, Irving S. Cutter and Henry R. Viets, A Short History of Midwifery (Philadelphia and London: W.B. Saunders, 1964).  93  and the lay surgeons”. 45 shown,  As the preceding analysis has  Cellier represented a kind of midwifery which had  been part of an earlier religion-based authority that “had laid its emphasis upon the regular performance of ritual duties”. assumed,  After the Reformation,  as Thomas concludes,  however,  “that... [such]  .  .  it was  .popular  ignorance was merely a hangover from Popery”. 46 Cellier’s association with other  ‘popish’  crimes,  conveyed in the three prints discussed in this thesis, deemed Cellier represented)  (and the kind of midwifery she  as dangerous and untrustworthy.  criminal actions,  Her  associated with the metaphor of the  Meal Tub as womb-like vessel deemed midwifery not only part of an outmoded hierarchy of the Anglican Church, but also a profession which promoted ‘superstitious’ practices.  This so—called superstition or ignorance of  women midwives would also be used by medical practitioners interested in promoting their own, ‘scientific’  more  skills in the supervision of childbirth.  Cellier’s representation,  which would have been most  visible in and around the city of London  (the place where  the medical professions were most numerous and powerful) could be interpreted on several different levels, depending on the manner in which viewers perceived them Renate Blumenfeld—Kosinski, Not of Woman Born: Representations of Caesarian Birth in Medieval and Renaissance Culture (Ithaca, London: Cornell UP, 1990) 27. 46 Thomas,  196.  94  according to their professional backgrounds, their religious and political beliefs. different political,  Regardless of the  religious and professional critiques  that Cellier’s image contained, remained constant:  as well as  however,  one thing  her popular representation was part  of a general critique of midwifery practice at this time. Moreover, perhaps the most potent form of condemnation of midwifery during this period was the inference that midwifery in its traditional form was  ‘popish’.  Such a  term encapsulated not only the nonconformist religious (and political)  critique of midwifery, but also the  professional condemnation of midwifery as a practice that promoted superstition and ignorance.  rt  0  CD  Ii,  0  CD  0 H,  H’  rt  0 H  CD  cD  GD  a,  I—  C 0 GD GD CD 0  ci,  rt  H H’  CD  0 CD CD CD ci, 0 H’ CD-  aq  0 rt  CD  I-i  0  I-.,  I-i  0  Cm  I.-,  CD’.  CC” On rtC  1.1. 0  C  ‘-I  CD I-J. 0  I-i  CD  CD  I\)  Enemies.  Ill. We come to dfcribe The General Days  .f Huralhiotion ap  pointed by His Majeftics Proclamations, on the rhirteengh of Novem. her, I 67g. and on the Eleventh of April, 1679. tO implore the Mercies of Almighty God, in rheProteaion of HisMajefties SacrcdPerioii; and that lie would infatuite and defeat the Counls of the Papifis, our  II. We d:ftribs The Alanner of their merthering Sir FJraecndbeory (odfrey, who toob Dr. Oatesu l)epofitions of eke Plot which WaS no more than eeery Gentleman in the Commillion of the Peace was bound yet for this nece(Tàry dilcharge of his Duty, theConfpirators to do were Co enraged, that they rcfoived to cut him of; the i-athcr. as may reafonably be fuppofed, to deter all other Magifirates from intermtd. lingwith any Affairs relatingto tce Plot. The Petfons aäually peeCent atghit Murther were, GPaI4 and Kelly, two Prifts, Green, Bury, and Mill, who were firice executed for it. The whole difcovercd by Mr. Miles Prasonce, who was to have aaed in it.  I. The Firft defcribes the 8urningof LONDON, which lacen proved undeniably by Dr.Oaees, Mr. ledke, andotbers, to be contrived and carried on by the Paytfis. A bleJd Religion, Sloe! muf? be intrtductd hy the Ruine of ft many tbosofa,,d Families! Itut Devajiarion alone would not Content, Without Stood: Foc, in the next place,  th Twelve DIVISIONS. 4 The PL.PTE h  0 oxceediis great is the Deteflatoon thit beer to the usheard.of Tyranny and ruatcbltfs SwperJlition of Popery, that they have ever fruce the Refinmation, but w,,re efpecsafly fines the Difcovery of the Lore Damnable and Hellilh Popilh Plot ageinji their Religion and Liberties, laid h.ld.f all Opportunities to exprtfs their ieoJl’ Abhorrence of it. A’n.ny ether ways, this of expojing their HelliSh Contrivances by PiLture was tiot thou&’r she tm.Jl csnteniptible  lje ep1anatton.  VII. To Ihew the Papilts would leave no Scone unturn’d to blow off this l-Ielli(h Plot, their next Stratagem was so forge a Plot upon the Presbyterians, by Name but in Truth tomvolve the molt zealous and attire Proteltant Nobility, Gestry, &c. throughout the Nation: which being fortified with bold Pcrjurics, and lecious Pretences, might gain Credit; and thereby they being deltroy’d as a Sacrifice the Li)? Tears Plot was .aely to Juftice, it might feem probable, thur malicious Contrivance again)? the Cotb.licks, who would then appear the King’s belt Scibjofts. The A4de1 of this dejined Plot againfl the Presbyterians was found iv Sir Wiiliam WalTer, m the Houfe of Mrs Cellier, hd in a ME4L-TVS, in a Paper Rook,, tied with Red Ribbon.,: It purported to be onely Remarl, or Cirnf He di of Things and Prfons to be charged; as, amongu the reft, lhere were named, the Lords Hallifax, Shaftsbury, Radnor, EfThx, Whatton, the Dui of Buckinghanc, and others, to be of Counfel in ibis pretended Con (piracy; tht Duke of Mon. mouth General; the Lord Grey, L.r4 Gerard, and bit Son, and SIr Thomas Armftrong, Lieiotew.,cdienerals in this Rebolious fr.ny; Sir WilliamWaller, and mbors, Major Generals; Colonel Manfel, guareer. onojier. General. Ry this whole C.rnrrcmoct it moft evidently appears, that their am was to ruins 41 that were trut Protejlanot, or bone)? Affereers of cbs Libertie, and Propsr of the So 4j17 : fir indeed there Cannot bt if..  VI. In the Sixth, The Manner of Mrs. Collier’i (one of the Pope’s Amatons) going todo that Great Work her flf, (Mr. Dongeefleld ha ving fail’d in the Attempt) and of her turning down Stairs. Although frequemly attempted, yes it bath p.k#d God 1stkert, (for the good of thu Nati by his crw.out Providence to ptofrrvo ibis lIonoitralole In-Jon; and it ii the Prayers sf41 good Proesfiants, flat ‘it oy never fall into the hands of hit Puptjls Adverfarie:, wh ttidor Mercies are Cruelty.  V. We come now to the ShasiMot,. Their next great Defign was to take of one of our gre eI*b qik.. the Right Hooourable Anthony Earl .fShaftobwy. In this Fdh Divifion we give you the manner of Mr. Daagefield’s conling to attempt him and,  Marcow,, Fenwictt, Gavon, Turner, iad, &c.  -  W. The next thing in order o(l’lme was fib Fxecut,mo of fvverd of ek. ?l.ttar,, viz. Calsman, Ireloi,d, Grove, P k!r, Whieeb,-eid,  Printedf,r Richard flaldwin in BalI.Court, near the Bjack bull in tht Old £iiley. MDCLXàX’.  LONDON,  XII. Laftly, We defribe Tb, mann, of the Execution of Willia Vofc.une Stafford, en Towtrbull, who was impeached by the Houfc of Commons in ió;S, of High-Treafon, in Confpiring the Death of the King; and was accordingly brought to Tryal before the Hoije of Lords, in Parliament, on Tusfday ehe laft day of November, and by them found Gui’ey, and fentenced to Death, on Tsoefeiay following, viz., the Seventh of December, 168o. and accordingly executed on Tower hilt the of December.  XI. In the next place, we delrihe their lioly Fathers rsceivag C’m f.rtab!e Letters froru EngLmnd, (with Tcari of Joy) of the likely Suc. ccfsof their Plot.  X. We next delribe fib marmor of eher teariog their Treafonabit Papers, for fear of aDifcoveey.  IX. We deicribe the manner of .Afasdsing 7uj1iee .ornolA, by Three notorious Rufflani; of whom, viz. Guts, bash been Jince ToyW, mid found Guilty, and artarhngly defervedly ptmsjbed fr is.  ,,  VIII. Next we comet. defcrlbe the manner of Mrs. Cellwrs fitting State onthe Pillory, near the.4pde in the Sso-an4 with her famous Wooden Shield, to defend her from the Fury of the People. Sloe wan’ ,nofljsoftly fomented to ibis tgcs.,anions Pnesj7sst )er minablo lying Pamyblet, eroeiiuled, Malice Defeated: A,Jloifed wit4 ft sway Lies, and notorious Eqmvscmi.ns and with Jo s,m,h Malice .oad Envy to all Protejiants in general, that the isk! was never pblirkjy fold.  Jgnrd al’eve so or three, no all their ions forged LG, that can wit!, ml Colour of Rcafon,or ufual accopeaoi.n of ibe Word, it riled Presbyterians.  CD  0 H  l’i’ H’ CI) y°  H’  C,  H  U)  l—°  0  0  0  Cl) 0,  0 C, CD  C,  0  0:1 tJ,  0  I-i  ‘°  CID  CD  __  -  15 g°  -  -.  °‘C  :°  chOw  •,  v  ,  :  :‘°.°tr [  r  ‘  :r’  BhiL  VVPK&4k2rlls Saitfljtth Jthiviwkth rLAtt1i.-’&e—err  tS  Plot. otrionnioboib osnolnood,, nnpiolnn/srcrlio woo u/shooo/sw?rh oIl/sold, irish oliitloftriptioo, Afoot i1oo& toFi nfl Pugtoor. On rho foromoA Anglo of to is one snUck, muftooonooooo Ho liol inns KoIr.und ,, oucolion of this Moth Po000ffl1 stout flu mob II dry sso Nil/st whfruulcluo/ moor. lstooJluouoo Oh /sPopc rondos! G dlo A piy gun F/sill or!) liol I-op F I I hPplhk!/soof l5000g001 h ppobrli/s sib bits oh dl /1/soo I h 3 on ohokiodorytro flood lotus P000nllonos in Idol- Crown, ooduco inronro Prows/s Isoforo list far, on ho diliib,oo/s to I thor/s hot Lcd’ Slot nuroiooi /.oo/s’o (tint Poniolloro Gooolnmro,pooo’ .dfoui-To1 kfr_Zt on ho on Afi ohofpooloiitl°cos ihou liholdoho Cog/sn rouhoog The dq nod pp bldHbo Dl noon Il , soon 0 I kfFC tip AooInin. su/s, 7 An uooooo’/s/slil, o4nn • u nOilo 0 LIII Ahhorroooy of fouls PoplAr with lot Fom to ohs Toil, nod ito block ØoolIfol Hoc, sopro’ Foohsht4n.CrroooIOcooO0,wpu.otilpooo lilt/sot Nor,, oslvl’oioo z&oopolioiscooownor Liooi. h’ooooodsloEooluhuooiro /sqo4 Afror lion 004$/sonar pnoioiooso,od !°onli0000oos of ohsy fist frooiog rho to Efigio h io risc/is locco/siorits lo w1 JIfhlDlfOilJ0filOIIhO lrj Cop most, nfr wohsksHoooolrroofi olin oh Ci. nSf C I /sh d I bi dl yosJ 0o soot TkltFodooodopJiE..4 &oh fl fyiIu ’ 1 1 I oIl neRigor rr°cs sholl got I I I I .tto , four Foynro, horn lomoFnsooif Grey Hoot Pop. ore sod Soon/s of foilsono irqoijisioi otofpicooullp lit ioohitPopoo orissrlbooiog rho oar/son/sup most /s Ira un/s the noun Soon/sfk issotooll, otto 1551 /sm oooooloo C Oduory dgd Sjoo rof nlior A fliploolid oohocM no si yhyrl CooP O’u O0Lyooon/sloocoo oio.oullhopp o t 1 u.k/shod 00 I I a/slim/sd f Os. ° Wood I I i Wooololoi.°doodofuwoiby/sgs; oliaoflrdor. o to ‘oPolioioo. ooOuft soo’Oooooot 0’oo 0 Ow fliI10 ‘rho, rhonholots-ooipfwocooolnog, oodoooo oono/soI by titAn/so 5looo.ohooroo oho4oo/si4dIuy, Thin/s Pop. Tl050000i000srloS000/sotP/s000o000ol0 00 blocloFrylloi 0r rio rsloto ftunoo .ofloo,oo, this l°tyifls CooolIn Loo/soodi005ouoonoftqo. ci FOoo/so,oisodTooohoo. Noioooooo rho 500oiso,Whi/suio,, sod sol- Boo5 t.pi5uooo/sto,w/sFioiI Il’s I/s sonools too of G’os’gi’o Too/s ,oiolsooo on rood owolloooioooooo. 4tr I’ orofl As oookoocjloouk, ,Ooo iootbsl uoq, 1 iiso,ils Pod. rtoooofooo Joloirs, 0 fooo hoodor on ott ,rkolt World, onolotmnonohoosiy°d oils Sroflo0000, olin oirli Oiolrusonio,isoo no’ o olsonot Ii 411 /s won-hoc lsyFowjlullloo ISP 1g Foooootyu,uor Ifp/sbofflorn offo by slitionlibooto olohor old ‘InTo, I. mod fllHooolp Oioflsoi/sy 4000000 tOp/sins y 1 COOl by I PI Roil oonio soo,fooi lb ll ° on ,ll c1 V 00 0L,_,0t0f t I I ho h O0OIOOP fI,c I 111 I 0k 0 t° t olOg rIti /srnlyCIlosbI JbpyOyf ol ‘°y dolt C I bh/sO’losdsd fL lull II rol 04 cn jns IdIhI II for/s 0 r.d ll\blfll ‘Iwn44,nw,o & ohoPooot3unolkoliu/soo,ood .0f.000ehorouj tofooo oP/si rio co on/s u A litiI-oi,so oisiáoig. ut/s itoh o sloitfuon uol,t lupoig, So. nohsosfofoh.oo, Ioior Pop,, &fo/swu ‘ sos Poo’ojoo 00000 oho’— y4/iOPu . Dolood too PoyiOoRiAorso, nod 000snohhihnyn, Olin hloCosnliosiogooooiroobrlsouosroron to In losool Isp rho lihofiooioo La/son, b°riooo/s for Afuohuohol Poor/so,, nooks Smooch soon tIm ‘uoio/sor”offis. Co/slit. 3. A Ott/s body, ocyotboooiog Sir lIor,hoooloc olity not holoof/sing to ohio Poyo foo in hoP tIny hoookio/shool in olin dry, nod ohrToioylo, log ssoooull oooiblosl Soooko /s(orioo i Pciu/suo -IVolhjoo, 00 olin Soar is Choqft&, 0 Suit ‘h/s nut IlIsutIp, on/s too of lois hIs,- loooo000 S/so. goodj, oGoodoiomoo r.ho.sorrooiol r.Ionsoi iloodoooo of 7 dowofsooh boonf,o/s cantor )dooi000. o. tom shdlioioro dboppol; nod Soosoolhr,ocoho Pout/son io Zoo,’ locoojo lithholsiio uyio [lulihook, shut rIse 0000000 ho goon, odibtobi ho/sSofo oosrr)r .PjIcoafP /1/si A hoG5 Soon f 1/ 1 /s( Loquuo f tour horo n°’ o/so1oDofIso 1 000 foon ho/solo, to IlooO,, with Loot oil .bofooo or/s bib/so/s tIn gy, )bhlypoooodnoo soolohloiiirs/sn, who oonriooiily of thom out so ogo Iiooioi is Ions H itir. -o han 00 rho puiootd-Cltth tyorfi olso JVsI/s.fisofo Csobulioot, nit. Iso Polisfis Cluogy of Poi0000d Cosoooufoofs. Afoot Ohiol’osoooooorronuo OIli’ooo of its 000010030/s,ftopoyooyo ct/sllodo A’IoJ,PnsoJOooR/sfgoos,itndbw./s, •° 1’ — T s snbI’bo 0000100 rn l5tInroOiyo,o1 4pflw ott o,uh roongsogisoo Culltoli orotog ‘tin iou hole i’ ?r’opoo,/siftoibcniocof Podono, on/sfoyiog, Son hint ,ooooyhoso4- dPfTooh?msrpsOaoo, bortpossco/s Voho. Anon, . — otlAoobonobio, cu/sodp0500fpomo,&rroywn&bh400i500/sLittfiltO#fr41i01.  Tic RX ‘P LA 2cAT ‘0  -Proci  -4  98  Fig. 4 The Solemn Mock Procession..., detail representing Elizabeth Cellier and Roger L’Estrange.  CD  r.i  rt  H  II  II  H 0  rt  ci)  CD  C’)  CD  C,)  ci  9I-’  0  C,,  CD  H  ci)  0  I-.  CD  0  H  Ui  100  iI  Cl K  .  i  ‘Ll  Fig. 6  The Murder of Sir Edmund Bury Godfrey British Museum, 1064.  (London, 1678), broadside,  101  Fig. 7  The Kingdomes Monster Uncloaked from Heaven 1643), print, British Museum, 375.  (London,  H H H  0  H  I-J.  0’ rt  ‘  ())  00  Ow  H- 0  rt  (DO  i  (Dr1  Cfl  -  (D  Q0  Ort  Co  ‘-I.  )  ‘°  wiut  Hcbrcakcth  76  .  Imall vcincs, and likcvvifc by the Navcll, heji màvcd with c&t:fdrce and vidlcnccin tJr vvomb: lo chat hcbrcakcthafundcrthc Lga. nicncs or osndcrs çbc fmali: Yciacs with thc coats or caulc,ii ‘hichh wrapped & infold. cd,IIay, zhcsc. dine v’jch thcoth 1 two coats or wrap. pcs, of ft heb bccnfpckcn bcfqre; and dorhprcparc ....:.ikiloofeh thc imrelfcco birch, after the maner of this figure. By this declaration andotbrwtrcn whih:arcprcfc41rcg. nnr aicJ laboring vvornen my n,2teandob. ktvethc true and.proper paincs, pàflions and thichindcrcoc-o. tIcr thhg, bu thc. ‘olenc aBEd ftrugglings :ofth 1nfascbcing Camo perfcion,vvich wbicL:’ is drivcn, t cd,*-nd rollcd and  Thpct’MidIJe. Lib. , 3  -  manner of a legiti mate and mofi na turall birth, if fiLt th head procccdc forth, the bands ftrctcLied downe wards by the fides, and laid upon he hips, as thc_prcfcnt Figure adjoyned doth (hew and cxprcfTc. But thcbirch is laid to be unna— turali,if any ofthcfc conditions and propertieS 1 flu!  tranccof the Macrix And this is rhcfornicand  and ctiiThcr, and (trivch downeard to the lower parts,thac he might have pafTage to come forth intO the light. For the membranes ot caules being broken by his flrivirig & violence, and the Matrix being dilclolcd and opcncd,thc humours doe begin to flow abroad,from which the Infant being freed and delivered by and by fecleth the aire, and through delirc of this life irollcd cowards the our-paf1gc of the Ma trixtis head turned towards the mouth and en.  Chap.1. The expert Midrifc.  .  A nrur11 bgtli.  •. -  .;  I  C  ••O  H H-  (1)  OP3 MM••  o ‘<  ci  P3  -‘it CO’<I-  ctCD H-ft  rt  MCDO  OciM  XbI QCDO  i3O 0 H-P3  L’H-H, OM  Ulo  P3ct  —JHI-(I)  H  Li  0: H  .  ci:D 0 Cl’ MCI)  Co P3  -  •  P3  CDCD  p)rt  CD 0 i  •.  •.  0  0  •  ci  CD  0) Fl ci  •  F-hO I-F, ‘-ii MUJ CDH-F(J)0 Cortct CD I-I HCDCt ‘oCflHCo•O O  M P3H-Z OP30 ‘< 0 ‘iF-  ‘<0  1Z ..3  rtP)  0  LQ HCD CI)  MH-CD  < ct 0 H  .  -..J 0)  H1 ‘0•  -  Q H-O H  P3(i) H P3  ‘iJCD  t-  W  CH P3d H-P3 P3ct CDrtct  HL’ICD (DH  P30 I-<H3 P3 P3  OH-  •.H  OH-cl) C1)H c1-H 00  Q.  P3  P3  COOM Hrt CI)  MH-i CD•• CD< HP3 HH  O Fl  •rti  ctCD  P30 0  •  CD  (OCDCD  CD(t  •tiCD cti  iCDCo 0CD  CDctF— P3ct ‘<M •CDM CD HI-Hi 0 Co  I1Hi  CD  •  : ‘<  ct  P)•  CDQ  LQH-  •P3<  I H-’ t’J0 H  (A)<  k)H-0  F—0  CD  CD ‘1  L-’I 00 M çi. 0  MH1CD CD •0P3 P3ct (DCD —(O.  H-Cl) M00 CDHCOHCO’ (Oct  •ti0  cd  0ti  )UiH HP3P3H IMMP3 II (TIM ‘<0 • 0  •  CDct  ‘<OP)H-  ft(O  COCO(D H-P30  (fl(OI  CDH-(D  iCDCDH1 H-dCD P3MH  CD  W H  :  CO (J1LIItJ  CDF-h  2(l)  .11 P3  MLII  CD  P3.  (I)  •.Fl CD  0  Li  CD II  0  P3 ii H ‘<  LII  O  IF-a H CD  0  •  HM CD —J CoH-  ct  H-fl ct 3F—  Fl  •  Co0’•. —Jo  0  1•M H.:.  P)  01M  (DH  CJ)H1CD  CD’Q’I  IiL1iL  CD  ii  W  COP3OCt iCD  CDtJ O ‘ZItI H  .  I I I  ctM  bisi OH COP)  ciO ‘z3  P3  H  Oct  CD  CoP3< Cl)0 Clct  C) LIIH  MQ(J (DH(D  L-’P3  ‘.<  ct  O  oo  H-1 c0 CDMCI) Mt Ii CO H-H”<  cr 0(1) Ict HM CoO OH  •  -  H-CD• pi  CCOHI  .  0P3  i(1)  OF-hCl) H  00  -  0 P3  —JF-  I..o  i—cnp.  P)P) OM  CDP)F1  p)HUi bCD  -  rj  0 P3  •  ci  ci  P3  ict CD Fl 01(1) 0 OP3 cti  HM  P3H-  t’ICD  H) HCDc-t-  —J  —J’s0  H0’< DM  H: 010 01 -J(J ICDHHM0 —JCDrt—J H(yiP)0 .cti P3  F—H0 P)CD MP) oM  CDI CDHH-  i—icn  OH-  P3I  Ui P3 H Ii  P3  CD Cl) Cl)  ‘<H-ci CD’< ‘tiM-..  ctcto  H-CD ct CD-a MCD COCCI H-Ui  <  C(tO  MH-P3 H-ct ), 0 H(D<  çt  OMH P)H  WP3  HCDH-ct •.H0  cCDH  H-iQO  H0O P3. H tYCD  •  I1P3 ‘<HJ  0-  (4)ctH-LQ  ‘-oCDCDO  i-ç  Co  (I)  0  CD  HHCD ICDct CO H —JO CP3 o i •M-  cyp)  OCDP3 H 0 P3 CO<rJ P3P3  P3H-  QtJ F-’CDO H-MH COCDH-  ‘.DP3CD oMCD •Hct ‘<rtci CDM LII<  H  ,oLxI0  CDP3rt cIOHCD XctCO(D i—IHocict  •OP3  0CD  -•  IIOH I-h-h’-H-CD HMCD  O[1  ‘-a LII  (I)  0  0  01  0  F-3 c5CD  •  ‘tjF-i P)H-I1  •  Cl)  H-  I-I C,)  CDH-i  t0  -‘  I  0  $2  •  ct (/20 P31-I  CD Co  H-  $2  H-  1-f, 0 II  d HhI CD 0 ft 0 hI  •  0 H P3 CO  C)  Z  WH-  II c-I-  0(1)  $2  O  $2Co  ct  HP3< Hp)CD  CD’< H ‘zj  HCD  .  cø  -  ‘<CDH-  CD  ct tt CD OM OH-’  i H  C)  C)  LXI  OH•  CI)hI  .  cX2  ‘)  H  0  $2  L0  •  CD  H P3 ii  -3  HCt H P3(l)  H-  CJ) p3 00  H-  ••‘-Q  $20 OM H-  OCD  •  CD’< .H• H  H o’CI  ti xJO siC5 COCD  LXI  O 1-h  P3H-,  ctP3  <COP) CDb CD hI COHc-IH-01  H-rI-N  c-I-P CDCD Q)zj LxJ cHH CDH-  P3F-]  OH-. 00 H-  (O(O (Octp)  2 CiO ••‘iCl) P)P3 H H-Q  H P3 I-I  C)  0  $2  0  •  ‘hI  H-ci OH P3  coo  ‘<i I c-I‘tiH’CI HhIa’P) 5 CD4 CI)cD5 ‘.Q D (0. H-’ H CD HLXIc-IoP3CD W cOCOCD hI C.ifthI Hft • Co P3 Cd•• HII  c5I-  •  0 ft H0 CD  OH•Ci) ct L-’O cthI S2’<  C)  p3  $1: •XI CD C)P3 OM  •  P3 S 1Z’  hIO  •  -1.ct 0) •  HP)CD  H P3 HIC)’ P3 con COO CDH HHH  C)  ‘ti hI  CO  -  HH-, CD  H11  CD  c-I-  Fd H CD  t)  ct ‘tlC)O l1HCD<(OH(OH 0  C) 0  CD  H H-  C)  J  ‘-3  hIG)  •  CD  0  0 CD1I ftM OP3  0 ‘-CIQ. MCD H-hI  •.  0L11 CDP3 fthI OH -<  c-Iti MHH-  Ci) CO CoC)CD 0C0 0 HO ‘-ohIH CXP3 —.J’tJ •CDM • H-  CD•C  ctQi ‘<H-hI P3P) ‘CI H  (OL’F— H-’<Ct  CDCOC) II  <  H-P3CD  -3  •  I I I  c-I-  H Oh  (OH  1’(i HH ø-Qct ODCD cøHhI •CDP)  C)  COO CO(l)  CDLCD  HCD ftP) C). $2 HP3 H H-WLQ hf,CD• OM Ms iCD H-Hp] P3CD ‘<CD ‘ti’ hI  hICD (0< H-P. Ct 2 ‘<  <.  CD  LXIhI H-H-  .  •<CJ)  OO frc1-  •ctCD  —10HCfl]  I I I  -  •  •  CD Cl)  CDO  H-  P3c-I-  1-IC)  Oh1 aM tYP-  C)  G)CD •CD  H-CD P3çt  L-’ ‘<  •.  oCoO co• hI a ‘<  P3(l) f-ct  ‘tiC1)IhI•P) H CD Co CO-] MH-  (DCD(D •.M CD• ‘tIe Oct HP3C) H-ct rI-H-H ‘<Oct  IiJ H-CD 1FtO  b  P3CD c2.I-I  C)P3H-  P3 II c-I-  C)  H  hI 00 01-I  C)  $2  CDCD i c-I••P3  0  ‘  .1-f, 1-h HjIi CD’ C) CD CD$2 Cn J. P3  HP) P3  IQ  LXIO  COCO 0-ic-I-CD •hI’< H-. P) H  HC1S  HH-  CDfrCfl HCD’  CD  P3 M H  C) IJ  t  .  cyCDO CXHH H •H-c-ICD MCD  HO  HNCD HWH H-YP3 CDCDCIhIrtHO  CDH-  P)CD Lx) t3 CDOhI ftH-,HCD LXIH C)H  NOP)  Ii P H-P3CD -h ctCD P3 CD çltict CDCD H-,H1 OH-.. 1< CD LIMO HP3M H-  ‘ti  HO  •.ctCD  cz— OCOHP)O  0P)  OO  •  I I I  •  HTI  0  CD’-] 0 C) Oti HI-I H. CD I $21 ‘QI  c-I-  •Q—  H-hI C-iCDHP3COc-Ii c-ICD P30I MO ‘<5C) ‘OCD CDH HMH c5CD H-O CXihI  O O CD—..  •  H-ct OCo  tYCD  H-CDL’I <hH HCD O)ctN •OP3  H-t5Fl CO’  CD H H H-  C)  hI P3 j  H  o  H  P3  Z  P3 ct H 0  0 1-f,  P3 hI ‘-<  ti H 0 ct H0  •  CD ft  )  CDLXI Q.F— •H N  WI-I G)  oCD  I-H-  CD H H  C)  •  I-i  $2 0  o  H  CD  0  H-, hI 0  c-I  Cl)  C)  p3  ti  H ‘<  CD CD  CD  I—]  1<  cD:zS  H o —3CD  -.  CD  C) P3  rJ 1  CDH-  •  —I  HCI)  7S-3  Cl)’l P)  i-<  0 0  O II  CD  C) Li.  H-  o  DF—  H  Z  P)CD i ftC)  It  ft  F-<  P.’  CD  P1  CD  •  •Y  cDHcft 0  H  H-  ‘l). CD (Oft (OY CD  P1  CD C) ft p-’0  O  oft GO • II  cTP)  I1I  ‘-<  ft(D  1O 0b Cl) CD II  CD0.  CDJ Hii i-<ft 0 II Q “1-h  CD II t’• 0  I. ‘-Q  I IHO  I I C!) I HIO’l  II-  i CO ICDCD  Iip.’  Li Cl) c-IIX)’1  ‘l (OHH-[-h  H<H-  CCD  P.’ H CD  i-<•  Cl)  )  0 Q •.  CD MCI) 0  0  CD  •-  D  C/)CD H H” ct  HS1 P)H0  ‘l  cDft  JF—  C) P.’ C1)(i  0  0 H  •  1<  H Hft  p.’  Cl) CD  ctCD P1 ‘.Q CDH0) ft 00 OM < CO 0 H  H-I-J  I I  H  0 II  ft CD  ‘tJ II H-  ••  0  L1 0  •  P1  HC)  ‘l Hft P.’  HP1  Q.  Q.  —I  ft  CD  HCD  C3 ibft H- II H<H-u CD0.’.Q ‘lLQ (OCD II Hft CD < L Cs) 00) ‘d ‘lQ.P.’ CDOCO (O COPI  PJH-  LQ ‘ti CDC)’l  CD  ‘lF—J  H-.  b  C) H 0 ‘ZI P3 CD  C) ‘<  •  •0.  NJCD  O0• P)H •  •.ICDz  CDIL.Oft  iI3p) MIP1b tSICD  (DP)Li F-if-a H bi HOIQN  -Ioi loXIH-  1I CD IC/)H-  OIM,ri-  F-<IOCO  HCO CD  i  Li  0 H •  HCO ft 0 II <  -  •  ‘-Q H CDP)  txI  OD  CYI-  HP)  COLi  0.  HCD ‘-< HOH HCD  iJ  P3(i)  Ci OL H HH-  CD -.J-ft  l)b’  :H-i  0.  OPI  s.QF-’ CD ftp)  CO’l H0 ft H- H-, ftCD Cs) CD H-ftCi) HHCDO  HH0C)CD ‘.OP)Q. H-HHCs) C) C)biP) D0H (DO  3FIHCDH-,C) i0IC1’l (Ji ft cH-E • I—’CDCD  •  ciCD 00(1) CDCD i—S CD ft 0 p3 iM I-tl HIoHLXJ —JCD’.Q i(n’.Q  ctCD-  O1—i  •  I I I  -  C!) ft Ii P1 II ft  0.  P.’  H-3 ‘O a)Q. (‘JO II  -  C)P1 ‘lCD 00 00 H 0 ZL.Q (D< H H-  ‘<  •G)  O). i  p3  •‘l HC) 1-ICI) 0  I1ft  ICD  IP1ft  IHCI)  Io kQty’  ftj  I I I  Li  .ICD  —JIHlICOH colC)O (j1I3I-  c-iIoco —ik  IOH IHH-  •.IHIO  —IH-  —.iI  iI  HICDO  ‘.OIH  —JIti WI-P. —iFI C)H G< 0• :C Cl) CD  CD  <H OO’3 HCDCD  Ii’lCD H-’< QCD. I(D0  IHCD’l  CDHIH-H)Q  I’  C) C) H CD ICi IH-H-’  H-  •  -.3  0 H-,  H-H5.QCO Dft ftO Ci)I-  -  CD••  OCD  Q.F—  P1  —.ip.’C)  D  bJH0<p) 0P) HQ. CO’l H-X (DCD HCI)Q.  ‘S’P)HCDH< i CD  CD CJ)CO C)(O H-HOOQ.  4 0 IC‘lCD ‘SIlP) •• 0 i  I-<M  HZF-lCl) (DO rt (D  Ci 0 •  p.’  b  —J  Cr.’  o  •  -  L L’O ft $D.CD.  (OH  H’l H-s.0 C)CD PlC) ft i H-Cl) 0  bi  ftLi H-P) I-h’l H-b C)CD II I C/)  H-3 CD0.  C)p)  Cl)  CDb HCD H’l  C) ‘s’P.  0 O N i-h 0C ‘lCD 1Ci) •.Ci) HCD . H  (I)  Ci 0  cø  H-  COCOP)P) ‘<ftI’l H’l1H<P)•(T) P1 ct I CD H-c)LCD P1 H-H •.tl[-bCD P)CD ‘CD ‘tJtS • H-C)H CDO ftCD H-COI.QH H C) s-ftCD (1’ C) ‘tlWP)ft O1HtYIQO 1--H-C5iCO C)iIS(D P.’ C) H 0 ft. H-H, Hs.Q H0 (0CD (OH H P.’ HH I-(OH-C1) ‘..QO’l(f) a’lP.s o 0 d’lC) PICDCD F-  HCD -iLiCO CDH’  Ci P.’  0  1<  H s.OHCo Hft •0 II  -  (I)  HP)H 1CD H-•• c-  COCD 0  H-ft  1]5 iQ. ftCD C)I-1  0.0 O CD ••  0  •  I’<  Iii  lCD.  kQIl  I ICi  ICl)’  Ci P.’ H H  -  H CD  CD —3 .oLi  H  ft  ‘lft CD COO CI)i-b  ItI  ftL 0 H-  ‘l OCD  oft  H-H<ft CDCD tCOP) H-ft ft ‘<M CD 0 H-H  “  ‘lCD Oct CD (t’l 0  o  F-  H  Ci  (n  H C)  I-]  ‘-3  0 ES  p  0 ES  p. •  H P) ES  Lxi ES  HES  CD  CD  (OW OP) ESM  CD  ES $2  Di.  (flct  CDH-  JC1 pisi p.  o o  (I)  H-  M  ES  Y.  ctl  •  I  OW  cY-  QH  Di ES  H Hi  QCD M CO L ‘<Di  •ES<•  bOO PiO HESESP-’ copirtES Co MES CJ1DOCO  ESES ••  CoCD COM  M CD  OHCOt5 Di H-a COOM HiDi ‘T•  HCDW H-Q’XPi ES IctM  I—IH $2 HO1-a  $2ES  H-H-OH<ESOES CD ESCD MLxlct C0ESCD H-LQCl) ctHctES ‘<DiC1)CD ES M O$2Di frhESP)  CD  CES  CD•ES  OH••OESP3 $2ct  pictES  H-OO 0DiES  CD  $2  P  ••  Co  CD  Cl) CI-  ES’I çlCD 0 ESH••ES H-  —L 1 • 0  ES•  CD  H-ctHCOCOO  bCD< HO  C.’-3  $2 H-  MO  ‘<CD  Cl) H H-rI-H rI-ES..  CDct(O  H-Hi H  ESOM H---’ CD <  CH-Di  CDP)0  H-ctO QOHi ‘PM  M(O  bCDES  Dl  ESM OCDCD  CDES •. CD ct  $2M OCt  OCl) CO HM H-HiES  P)H-$2  (10 I HD)C5 .00 HM H-O Oct  H-ES$2  DiL -.JC) 0 •MDit5  OD  H-SD. HOES  %(1)Q  CnF—dCl)PiH-  MM  ((100  Lx1JCo  Di II II H-  Coo  Di  biCo  H0  QH“ct  00 MH  X  ‘-3 ES OCD  $2 •  ‘TI  CDON CDCD  HHDiCD ES  0 L’iO ESF— i11  M P)X ctp H-M O ES  O$2  cCD C’CDP) •ctES  H  H-CI) (DOCD HESDi H H-P) ESM  ‘sLQ  OH-H  Wd HCDP P)H  I I I  bESH-  OCOQ  ctCOO  ESDiHH-H  OESM  CnES OCDct  -  CO  LQ ‘H. H-  L’lES ‘ES  HMH CD’-<HN $2 piP) CDESb 1CD ct  rtOLxl  CD  xi’-3’< OES  CD  CD  OP)JM )ciul  P3 II  ES  ((1  00  O Mct rI-H-  •< 0 H  CD  •  0 Hi  OM ES’-< •.  çt  OES  0 CD  $2  Di ESCD  ‘-a  0. M  CD  CD’i  ft 20  •  S-I-o—JQ I-J  HH H  t’.)  Ct  •  Hi  0  ct  Or-IMCD ‘-<ES  rI-Cu  (OH-  H-Cl)  M  CD  •.Cf)D) 01 01 c3iHID) coH  HCD< CD  ODESH-  -.----MHH $2 cDct  O  CX)Hi  ‘<ES  H H : CD ctCfli—I H-OL1 ESOES H-O ESCDM OctDi  ••  bICD  H-Me OCDDi H-O’1 ESctHCD’-<$2  cn’< CDct S2CD  0  ft  Di  ES H-  MES  HiH-  0(1)  H-H  ES  CD LQ —.lrt • 0  HHES  0  CDW (OH COO  M  DiES HLQ  ‘Ti  ‘<‘-<  ctQ  H-D)  MCD COM  H-t<HCDct  OLi  HiCD  OES  ‘-<  ctLQ  H-ES  (OH-  ES  CHi CDES Mr-I-  <CD  H-HP)CD ESCI) Di  $20  CD J—I’.Q ESPi  ••  0 Ha H(OCD  ‘TI  C2t P3 HIM ES< $2CD H-’< Di ESCi Di.  H-CO  ESCD  M  ‘d  CD  ••  H. CD ‘-<  CD ES WCD MCD  •.ES  MCDH CDESP) Cnpict CflH-ct Ci) Co F—D)C/) coESct 0DOCD CX)CDj  ES  Hi Hi p.  CD ES  ‘tJst5  Di  CD  M  H CD  C) II  C) II  P)  ES  H-  ESct Qsi Op. ES’<  (Dcl)  P)XD’ M  CDN •. 0 H  H ‘-3--.1  HiM OCD M $2ct •.O  ‘<si  Di Oct  0  $2PJ DiM •H-  ESO  PiP) iQH Di  ‘do  dHMct OH-  ‘-o$2O • H  O1ES  -opi  —  (1)H-H 0HESC1)  ESQ  (DH-ES  ‘tb M’dti  •  I  I I  M  HCO  CD  (Or-S  MES CD  PJCI) ct H-H-  (ii —J  CoLXI •ES ‘.Q H  ES COLQ  Pi HH-  OM ESP  C0C1  CD$2  $2 . Di ‘TiES  —JESCO  Dict  H- 0 0 ‘.Q ‘SC OCD iH MH-O CDrtHi (OHCOOd P)M HHH  DCOP) H-CDrt COP  C)C)  ••ES•  ESCnCI  OH-.  LWCD OM ESH ct  ‘1 ‘-Q  CD 0  0  H). I:  (J1a (J1H  I  •“-)  L.iH C’  ID  HES HL.Q  MM  bCD CDCD  OES  Oct OHctO  0  H-Q. CD Li •H CD  <ES  CDDi  HES Cl)  pio  MO H-Ct OH-  OCD  H-: Cl)LXl ctH  I  I I  M  ‘DES ‘-.0(i)  -a  CO  Cl)  M Ct MES CD•  H-P  cttj ‘<H  HH  (•) ‘TIES OH-  ••Hi  M $20  H Cl) Oct O HiM O’-<  •  tMES H-CD  X  o  ‘-<CO  MCD  Q  P  CDDi  0  HCl)  0  CD H  H 0s  c’  MLQ COQH  H-  <I  Mit  CDCD COP) CO 13 WQ  C)  13  H0  Cl)  (01< C0  Cl)  C)  CDCD  MH  P)CD II  CDH‘<it “H-  (OH  MO  CDd  0. II 13 H-Ui  M 1<  H  13  C-i  Hb  CDP)  CD 11  C)  C)cl) p)it HM H-H-  OHH0  13 it  cØH • H-HC)P)  iD13P cyCOM  itO 1<0  H-  (CD  1113’  CDct  o  CD  CD  it 13’  13 D.  PM CD  II  H-H)  CD  H Cl  •. 0 ii 1<  H-Cx)Hitco 1<.Cl)  CD I Mf-  Ho P)  Q.  it  H0(0  inciC3  CD  0  •  (OH-  CD<  WCDCJ • HP)  O3 —J.Q  H F—CD  N  H-  CHCO  CDP  ii  CD •  HO  ctiQtJ  Li  C) CD  )  i-I  i  o  o  MitititCD  MCiO CDMCi  0 13 ••  3  0  •  CD  13  P H H CD 0  H3  ‘<I  CDS MH•.it  P)  13 13  COO itlI  CDH)  CDC) H-O 013  ‘13  •1  13 CD  CD H-  •.  13  0  •  ••  it CD II  13  Ci  H13 HO H-CD F<L1P).. 01 M•  INJ  HCD.  ‘C1H-CD  COCDO Cl) C) 0i11 f—HI  (J’b’OH •MP)P)P) H-HC013 l •  ODH-it13  —J13H)  OP)0  13 $1  C)  Hit H-  HC)CD  P)P)  1< C) 11  OP)C1P’O  ‘  CO •  ‘OH  1311  it  HCD  if)  (O1<F—’  CDCDCiM13 (OMMH-CD  MCDQ  ‘tiit  1<CDM  it bM 1<0CO OCDit  H-’<Y’OCD  CoOct  ctflp)  Mitct COCD HM  <IC1CDMØ CD CD-CD  <ICDL CDH-  0  0 it •  H  in  H-  b  0  CD  •  13  P)  C)  13 P)  it  C)F—l  ..o  0  H•  J CD I-1 CDH(013 (OHCO  1<  H-C) it CD  (o13  <ICo CDif lIP)  Clt3 pH-H-  H CD  CD H  MCD  CD  H)  H-  H-  CD  •  CD  00  L.Q  C)i  p)  •.CD it  1O 00  P) -5 O  0  P)it  Cl  H-itCD  ctCD  H-Ci•  CDCiCDC-i  •  1’<CDL  11H HP) ctH-’ M H-bYP)  b•  P)•H-O  P) QP)HS  I-I  ci 0  H-CD  C  cxr’ •  aP J  •  Cl) itCI). (DCD 11< CD  0CD (DM•  H-ct  CDP)’  ‘‘  -J L’JC.1 • 0  H LCD  CD CD b  0 I-  CD  ‘.0H  CD HH-  1M O II P)C!)  PJ1 CD  H-  Hit N MCDtJ  CD  0 13 ••  13  0  •  H P) 13  LJ 13  H13  t’)CD •  c)F— —1ø  O 13 -O H) H  Oct HHCOO  O H-H OCi  <I  1CD  P. •  )  P)CD H13 H-C) -h13 0 II 13 H-  011  O(D H)  H-13 t ‘<it  (OH-  CD(s) 11  H- Pi  do  ••  CD 1<P)  H CDct MCi T’M HCD  C) Ci  ‘OOCo CD •  HH-C)  I-’F-a  H)  CD  COOH COHH-  CD<O  I  i I  ItH-  •  H-Cd 1• CD  Cl)  CO  CD  c_ 0  •  CD  0 Cl)  CD MH CDCD Cn’< CO  H-CD P)M  0 II  H).  H-’<  I-’M  O H)H(0 Qit p0  1<F—  itP)  CDH Mit COCi H- 11  H-C)  CI  •.  CD  O  ‘-  0  CD  Cl)  CD’  H  Q<  f‘Dit  it  13  ).  13  it 0  1313  13H itHH-CO  L’J  PiHMCD H-13 13it O.• ••  C/) p)Q 133 CD  •  C)  it  HCD  CnHIH  —3(l)  ct CD I—  -  CDPi  OC)  H  OCD  ‘<Hi  M  I-I N PCOP  L W 1 H-0Cl) tYOCi  ii H H  •  0) C) I  H  ••  coP) —313 o.  —0  L\)  •P.  (Iin H-ct 00 Hit OH lQCD 1< Pco13  lt)I H-  O  ‘1 1<  O•  ctCD  H H-H(O  C)  JCD  CD  it  01< H)P)  II  HP)  PiX  M  C.AjN  HOit  (‘s)CH-  0 i-I 0  H  CD  Ii’  I-j’Zj CDO (OH (OH it OHH-jCD  P)C) ‘ZIP) H  it  CDP)  CD Co  b 0 HMH) ‘øH —CD —flQ() • CDC)  “  (nP)if)  CD  ctHit 1<CD CD ti• II H  Ilt::tjO COQ.F-i H-CD  H-CD• <IC))  iQ  OP)  C1CD  Mø0  P)  <  M•  CD ‘1M  0 0  I-  O Es  0  •  C)  •  CD  H-  0)  •  Cl)  Hit  ci-52  COEs  p.)  H  O Es  d1P) ‘ti’d CD M H ‘.OP)  CD(0  0 H)  51  M H51CD  0 H HEs CD  L5’Es  •C) CD  Co  • •  •  (Pit •.O M P.’ flit P)HO  .QCO  0 P)’--3 Es b’CD M H-l 51(0  •  -  Hit ‘-DEs’ —1(0  OEs 0 P) (0Es  bJ0  (1) .CI MCD H-F-’ EsH(D’-Q H-  dEs 1 (D•  ct  H-  H H HCD M •  CD  0  it  CD  LXI H HN P.’ b  O H)  H  •(l)  ‘-3  p.) H  0  H-  H-CD 0 52  MEs’  CD-3  ‘<..  MM HCD  P)(i  H-HEsEs it it 1J0 CDSi H L’Jit  II  ‘<‘ti  .  ‘-.ØH-P) CoEsEs cOH-52  F-Es  HO (PH) 52 LQiO CDCD CD H-Es  •  SiEsEs it  EsM7 ••SiP) flit itEs iH-M 00<  Oct  2CO-  CD L(Thf— 000  CD LcJM CDH <P’ CD H52 0 d 1 C (PP.’ Es ctCD  P‘-<CO O 1  CD  ‘s •CD  CD  it  M HP.) H  CO  U)  0  rt  •  CD  Es  52 CD  0 0 H  C5 H-HEsO Es’ itCD Es’CO CD”  CD  MH  OCD SiEs Hit it SiO  EsC0  COOCO  b’ 0P) OSiM itP)  Hi  H,OLXI  ‘C5  MMO CDEs •.it. P.) it H-’-3 Es0Es 0Es(D  Ot5  (PU) ‘-<MH-  2.i-1P) CD  P.)  C)) 0  Xi  •  —3  (-  H 0  52 0 Es  L 0  •  CD  Hi  H-  H52  d (P M it  Lxi  CD  Es  ‘-  •  0 b  W  H) H)  CD  •  0)0  0H-  P.’ H’Zj  HCD HEsØ M  ‘XIHMEs P) Esit  iCD MM itO)  0) LiSEs’  •.H H-  s’b  OO MSi  I-<  H (PHCO  •L1 Es  C) C)  —.3.  OHH)  lEs I-P)  M  13’ CD M  (DEs  H itO  M HH) P)CD  051  I-hf-’-  51  EsHitCO CDEs’  HFt5  MO  ‘tJ’ZI  •0 CD H L-H OHEsCD 51M 0 Esit •.Es CD  0(0 0.  b’M  •CD  Ob0  HMCD cp.’  H-OM COP.I C5HP)CO  CJH-CD P)ti <0’d  0  1 OiL‘.øCD .O0  H  -,  Q  Mb  ctCD COIl  it CD  0 (0  I—  •  51  Es 51  HEs P.)51  itP)  U)M 0(0 0  51Es  -it CD  it LXI EsCD Q Hd P)M EsH-  (DEs  H-I-li  HOM ‘QM’-< -iS’ —1 0  •itO Es  O1P)H-  (.3,0: 01 —J ICDt HMH—JCDO —.3 it  HEs•  H  CD  52  •  •  M  H-  C/)  CD CD Es  b’ CD it  H).C ...J5j CD  CoO  HHP) 0’I-’  -,  O Es  52  L-’O 011 Es  -  MO •Es  (DH-  H-it  I-P.)  .0) P) OH (PSi Hit  52COH-  (0  HH P)CDP.I EsMEs  P.’ it MCD  P)CD I  CD  CDHct  M(DP)  IHCO  52 P)blCD 0M 520  0  ‘tJ  ‘—3  -  0 M  •  •  .  M52 •  00 CDSi HM H-CO CDCD  •CD  (oEs’  M H-i--s  1<  b”  COEsQ,  CD H-CM CDP)CD  <  P)H)<  Es’H H)CDO it 0 MLXI P)52 ‘-MH•HCO 0 CJOO  ctH CD I 52ct’b  0  •  “  LQ CD  M H51  b’  0 P.’  •  P.) Es  C)O  HH) ‘.0 ‘.D  -  COCD  M’--3 i)Es’ H-CD it ‘-<Cl) 0 ‘-HMCD CDEs (00  <  H-. CD  EsP)  P)0 Ht5 Il H-O 52M IQEs CDCD H CH  00 52itt5 OMO EsH-’d ••<HP)CO EsEs ‘tJO 11(0(0 HEs EsOP)  00  CO 0  0  L0(D  CD  1-3  11  -  (np.’  0)  H  I  .C)  (A)0  —.JD  51  H cOH  -  •.  0 Es  L-M  00) Es•  •F-h  •O  •  •  ‘s’çl EsCD 00) HEs’.Q  CDEs’  0 P)H51(0  •  C)  F-EsCD cYH coI<Fd  P)’H-Es  (OH  •  (0(0 ‘-3P)’s H 152 (Jct—. P)Ci <bC HM CD’d  MP)  Es  0  52  Es  0  L  •  CD it it CD M  (0  -  CD  ‘t3  0  CD  it  it 0  Co (D M  Es  Cl)  -  H-  CD  •  CoO Q H H H,C0Es  0  itH: ‘<Es LXI MEs CD’.Q (OF-’  p.)  Io’  52  (DCDCD 5211 -Si  ctH-I-t,  ‘tJOHMCDQ H-Hz EsHH-  CD  (00) H-  tY< M H-P.) 52Es LQ52 CD ‘tJ d1O EsH H-H<it (PHMO  M  P)CD  0 O’ZI  •.  b-’Ci MO H52Es ‘.Q• CD  H H CD OM P)’  H-  F-  •  Co  CO  M  CD  0 Es  Si  0 I—’ P.) M CD Es  ••  Hi 0 M 51  0  01 C)  Co  H  I  C)  01  CD II  H 0 Es  Hit  it  0p  ciict’-<H) iQCDCO CD Q  liP) ‘< QCD• ci:  —3 H  IO  01QX P p1ct CD I (.a)ciCD  cxDciH-  ii  •  CD’<JHCt CDCD H1li t’3• CD -Ct cø liD)•) I 0 HLIICDd i’tiOC/) • ctH-CD HIIOrtCD tl O ‘<Cl)Oct H)CD ‘dO CD 0H<i lH-ct ct CD CD Hi ui. rtCD Cl) W(D H’-< 0 c3L1IH)  H-p1ctrt  ct ‘tlH-(l) P)lict H(fl30 H ••CDli cOCJI 00 010 L’OP)  •  ctH,H(DCl)H-Ii5 ctOOp1  H-rtHHC)  CDliH-P) YIP)M’1 liHOrtct  QO  •.H-P).  CD tyL2Ict liciCD< H-. lip) Ii ci p1HQ CDCD  P1  Hc1 ci C)• 1ct  CDOH-CL ••P)  liPct H-HH-(D Hli Q.  liO(DQH-H-lili  tYH-H-rt’  •<CDH-  HH Cl) 0 tiOt5 P)CDP)CD 1ct  O(DH-: li1 ctctH(DH-H li-hH  I I I  :  HCD(D  •  ci  Cl)  Ct  ctCl) L-iP) OliH-•• CDCo CJ) P)d 0 HO •.O1C)H CDCD C) IWHCDHOC) P)YciP) cH-H ctC)(D l)’CI H-• 0 ••li Hi LII  •  HOO (DH-i HCD. iJ F-3’ :H1< LQ  CDLQH-H-  ø’H-CDCD IQ HCDH-P) HHOLC C) H • LiCD 1 LHctct  ‘  HH H HW-’-3Op. OiD’H Cl) OO(D ç. ‘ç< Cl) QCD(1) CD -P)Li1 çtU) D LQ< cDP)h1H H-H-. QCl  H-Cl) CO  (DO  •  —1  H  0 H)  ciC°  P)O  H-  tJ HP)Ii (DliO 4sy0 ICD HliCO oQCl)  ••CD  F-OCi ‘oHli 01 XctH‘-‘l  HP)CD HI  N)i’t5  CD H-  CD  X •ct  k) Hli HI  ci  Olli CDCD ‘-Cl) ••Cl)  o’ti  .—CD H  O’d ii ‘<0 H) 0) Curt  ItH-  lctC-CD  Cl) liO  I—lQ CD :t5 Cl) 0 •  H  CDH c-t. H-:: çt ‘-3  P)P)Ci)  x.  p1 H flC  C)  H O  $D. 0  L0  -  C) CD H H H CD Ii  J  LII H H N p1 t3 CD Ct  0 H)  ‘-3 i-i 1<  CD o H  HciCD Hci HH F-1c5P)  CD  H  p1 li H: CD’—3 Cfl CD  ct  H H H HaiOc5 siaD) hc’.  


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items