English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

During the long eighteenth century the capital code, and more specifically the so-called 'Bloody Code' which subjected a vast and increasing range of property crimes to the death penalty, was the centre of much popular attention and of extensive debate. The impact of the Bloody Code has also attracted much attention from historians, some of whom have argued that it played a vital role both within the criminal law and in eighteenth-century social relations more generally. However, the geography of the Bloody Code and the possibility that there were major regional differences both in the use of hanging, and in attitudes to it, has been largely ignored by historians. By systematically exploring the spatial dimensions of capital punishment in eighteenth-century Britain, this article demonstrates the refusal of many areas on the periphery to implement the Bloody Code. The reluctance in the far western and northern periphery of Britain to execute property offenders, it is argued, requires us to rethink some of our core assumptions about the key role historians have given to the Bloody Code in maintaining the hegemony of the elite, about the process by which the capital code came to be reformed, and about the reach of the state in the long eighteenth century.

Rethinking the Bloody Code in Eighteenth-Century Britain: Capital Punishment at the Centre and on the Periphery