ABSTRACT
I have been arguin g tha t the English Revolution mad e possible the expressio n of an egalitarian political imaginary that justified women' s participatio n i n the political publi c sphere . Althoug h mos t o f th e wome n petitioner s coul d b e characterized a s supportin g th e Parliament , the y wer e radicalize d b y Parliament's refusa l t o tak e seriousl y their clai m t o b e heard . Som e women , however, espouse d royalis t positions , i n petitionin g o n behal f o f Henriett a Maria an d fo r peace . Thu s th e petitioning wome n coul d no t b e categoricall y defined a s eithe r parliamentaria n o r royalist , jus t a s th e apprentice s move d from supportin g th e Parliament agains t Charles I , to advocating hi s return an d later th e Restoratio n o f Charle s II . I n thi s chapte r I propos e t o examin e a similar slippag e - ye t one that proceed s i n the opposite directio n - i n the subject positions o f women commonl y designated "royalist." I will be arguing that th e structura l positio n o f "royalist " wome n di d no t alway s predic t thei r political positions, an d that their adaptation of the political discourse deployed by thei r les s privilege d counterpart s i n th e Englis h Revolutio n le d the m t o adopt subjec t positions tha t wer e no t completel y i n alignmen t wit h a royalis t espousal of monarchism an d patriarchy. Indeed, we may recall that during the Revolution, som e aristocrati c wome n supporte d wome n o f lowe r ran k wh o were petitionin g Parliament . Suc h a n articulatio n o f equivalence s betwee n women of different rank s brought about realignments in their subject positions. I will dra w m y example s o f suc h rearticulatio n fro m materia l cultur e - embroidered picture s an d casket s crafte d b y youn g royalis t wome n - tha t derive their representations from the political discourse concerning wome n and politics in mid-seventeenth-century England. The political writings of Margaret Cavendish, the wife o f one of the most prominent military officer s o f Charles I and th e tuto r o f Charle s II , exhibi t simila r contradiction s an d slippages , i n articulating position s sympatheti c t o parliamentarians . I n bot h instances , th e authors manipulat e th e ideolog y o f cultura l an d literar y form s t o produc e contradictory effects .
