Seminars: Provincialism At Large

During 2019-20 the project will be hosting a series of speakers exploring the idea of provincialism, regionalism, and scale across the nineteenth century. The seminars are a collaboration between Royal Holloway Centre for Victorian Studies and Centre for Geohumanities and explore the concepts underlying the project through interdisciplinary conversations, ‘at large’ across the circulating imperial networks of nineteenth-century provincial thinking. We are very grateful to the organisers of the long-running ‘Landscape Surgery’ programme in the Department of Geography for their support in programming this year.

Seminars Autumn Term 2019: 9/10/2019; 19/11/2019 in conjunction with Landscape Surgery

Josephine McDonagh (University of Chicago): ‘Provincialism, Multilingualism and the Novel:  early nineteenth century migration to South America and Jane Eyre

Wednesday 9th October  2019 2-4pm, 11 Bedford Square 1-03

Suggested reading: McDonagh, ‘Rethinking Provincialism in Mid-Nineteenth-Century Fiction: Our Village to Villette’, Victorian Studies 55 (2013): 399-424. doi:10.2979/victorianstudies.55.3.399 http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2979/victorianstudies.55.3.399 or email ruth.livesey@rhul.ac.uk.

Katrina Navickas (University of Hertfordshire):  ‘Customary rights, property and contested belongings in English commons and village greens, 1795-1965’.

Tuesday 19th November 2019  2-4pm 11 Bedford Square 1.01

Abstract: This paper examines contested customary rights and landownership of commons and village greens in England in the 19th and 20th centuries. The 1965 Commons Registration act sought to map definitively the extent of common land and associated rights in England and Wales, but it was a flawed piece of legislation. Its implementation revealed the widespread difficulties of defining a common, its rights and its ownership, much of which has still not been resolved today. Some of those disputes stretched back into the 19th century and earlier. This paper takes as its focus the case studies of the 1795 court case about the village green of Steeple Bumpstead, Essex, and the contested ownership history of Wisley Common, Surrey, from the 19th century through to the 1965 legislation and the present day. It feeds into current academic and popular debates about land reform and legislation. What do such cases tell us about local and regional identities, and popular ideas of the commons and common rights? Why did people still claim common rights in 1965, and today?

Suggested further reading: Fitch vs Rawling, Fitch & Chatteris, 4 Feb. 1795, English Law Review, 126, p. 614-618

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s