1600s

CREDIT: Ivan Bunn and David Butcher

Origins

This article is in its original form, with minor alterations. It was published (with editorial adjustments and changes) in English Ceramic Circle Transactions, vol. 21 (2010), forming pp. 49-74 of that journal.

The large expanse of water on Lowestoft parish’s southern boundary provided a freshwater fishery for coarse fish, which had nothing to do with the town’s commercial sea-fishing activities. The mere was always referred to as the Great Water or the Fresh Water during the 16th,17th and 18th centuries (and probably before that, as well) – later becoming known as Lake Lothing during the earlier part of the 19th.

Introduction

First of all, reference has to be made to the geographical advantages of Lowestoft’s position on the East Coast. A substantial number of its male inhabitants made a living from going to sea, while others remained on shore and earned money from processing catches of fish and handling other cargoes. A select minority of these latter even grew wealthy through maritime activity, because they were the people who owned the vessels which caught herrings and cod or which carried merchandise of different kinds.

Formal recognition of Lowestoft’s status as a trading port might never have been given in 1679, had the town not managed to free itself from Great Yarmouth’s claim to control all maritime traffic in local waters – especially that connected with the herring trade. Articles relating to this long-running and contentious issue are to be found elsewhere in LO&N’s History pages (The Lothingland-Lowestoft-GreatYarnouth Disputes (Parts 1 & 2) and a summative comment can be added to this.

Late 17th Century Public Collections Taken in Lowestoft

Quarter Sessions Punishment (Lowestoft)

With so much material being available for study of misdemeanour and nuisance (as shown elsewhere in these LO&N pages, in Manorial Governance), the ability to assess the degree of felony among Lowestoft’s inhabitants is made a great deal more difficult by fewer records and by the difficulty of accessing those that do exist.

The Governors and Governed in Early Modern Times

In the absence of research relating to felony, and with ecclesiastical court records left largely unexplored, the leet court business in Lowestoft (see Manorial Governance) will be used as indicator of attitudes towards the regulation of local society. There were two differing views of the role of the Law current in pre-industrial England, expressed by James Sharpe in Crime in Early Modern England, 1550-1750 (1984), p. 143.

Ecclesiastical Visitation Material (1606, 1629 & 1633)

Before the Diocese of St. Edmundsbury & Ipswich was created in 1914, Norwich Diocese was one of the largest in England – covering most of Norfolk and Suffolk (with small areas of the western margins of both counties coming under the Ely jurisdiction). Suffolk was divided into two Archdeaconaries: that of Sudbury covering the western half of the county and that of Suffolk covering the east.

Serious crime, or felony (consisting of treason, murder, assault resulting in serious injury, witchcraft, highway robbery, arson, burglary, rape, grand arceny, forgery, counterfeiting and smuggling) was largely dealt with during the Early Modern period at the six-monthly assizes, held usually in the county towns of the realm. Though some of the offences named, if deemed to have been of a lesser level of seriousness (mainly, matters of assault – including rape – and damage to property), were handled at the three-monthly quarter sessions.

Mid-16th to Mid-18th Century

The Manorial System served both as the foundation of land ownership and management and of maintaining the peace and good order of each local community. It had its origins in  Early Medieval times (what was formerly known as the Anglo-Saxon period) and was further shaped and developed following the Norman Conquest – which is now taken as being the start of the Late Medieval era.