ABSTRACT
Despite effort s t o foreclos e women' s politica l subjecthoo d throug h domesti c tragedies an d othe r literar y form s suc h a s misogynou s satire s tha t justifie d women's subordination , wome n in Stuart England did begin to rearticulate and redirect the negative interpellations enacte d by this type of disabling discourse . As I discusse d i n "Ann e Cliffor d an d the Genderin g o f History," afte r bein g disinherited b y he r fathe r o f he r rightfu l baronia l titl e an d estates , Cliffor d sought t o justify he r claim s b y compilin g a monumental genealogica l histor y that focused on her femal e ancestors , fo r example Isabella d e Viteripont, wh o held th e offic e o f hig h sherif f i n he r ow n right . Sh e thereb y redirecte d th e ideology o f th e for m o f genealogica l histor y tha t traditionall y shore d u p patriarchal successio n an d privilege, from the point of view of a female subject who seeks female precedent s and exemplars. Her recovery of the prominent - but b y the n occlude d - politica l rol e medieva l wome n playe d counter s the efforts i n the seventeent h centur y of men suc h as Edward Coke an d Simond s D'Ewes to deny political right s to women; the ironic asymmetr y lies o f course in Coke' s an d D'Ewes' s championin g th e rights o f the Common s agains t th e Crown.1 Ye t Cliffor d di d no t publis h th e Grea t Book , whic h recounte d thi s genealogy - a perfec t exampl e o f wha t Foucaul t calle d "subjugate d knowledge" ("Tw o Lectures, " 82-3) , thoug h i n term s o f gender , no t socia l hierarchy. Rather , th e Grea t Boo k an d he r diary , whic h detaile d he r extraordinary resistance agains t the agreement to relinquish he r claims , draw n
!See Stopes, British Freewomen, for an account of women's earl y political role; on Coke, se e chap . 7 , "Th e Lon g Ebb. " Hirs t recounts a n astonishin g inciden t i n whic h D'Ewes disqualifie d th e vote s o f widows i n th e electio n t o th e Lon g Parliament : h e "instantlie sen t t o forbi d th e same , conceivin g i t a matter unworth y o f an y gentleman and most dishonourabl e i n suc h a n election to make use o f their voices although they might i n la w have been allowed" (18 ; emphasis mine) . Thi s i s especiall y notabl e in light of D'Ewes's statement "tha t the poorest man ought to have a voice, that it was the birthright o f th e subject s o f England " (qtd . i n Underdown , Freeborn People, 55) , a statement tha t anticipate s Rainsborough' s championing o f the politica l right s o f "th e poorest hee" in the Putney Debates.
