BOOK REVIEW 101 cultural unity to a particular social group? Are we left with only random definitions of a culture, where submission is revolt and revolt is submission and where power relations drift in a flux of collective whimsy? Thompson thinks not and his impressions are clear and categorical enough. He constructs a model of eighteenth century England in which there are two distinct cultures, patrician and plebeian, with the former as hegemonic. It is within this model that he discusses the bread riots, the struggle over common land, the development of factory discipline, wife-selling and the charivari. According to Thompson, the agrarian gentry that ruled in the aftermath of the Settlement of 1688 led the movement for land enclosures, commercial imperialism, and a vicious penal system based on the Lockean principle of capital punishment for property offences. The plebeians responded to these changes by invoking custom, by demanding the gentry uphold paternalist policies and by asserting an economic morality greatly based on the common use of wealth. The character of eighteenth century riots and rebellions was not for overthrowing the gentry but for pressuring them to uphold their end of the bargain. The 'patrician banditti', or, as he also terms them, 'the agrarian bourgeoisie', were not insensitive to such appeals for their rule depended much more on a 'cultural hegemony' rather than brute force; they had a permissive attitude towards crowds and often relented when faced with popular opposition. Even though eighteenth century society 'appears to offer few genuine paternalistic features', Thompson argues that there was enough substance to the 'old paternalism' to keep it the object of contest until the 1790s by which time the steady growth of a market-based economy had led to a complete breaking of the ties of reciprocity. This model has the advantage of allowing for an unequal and exploitative relation between the gentry and the plebeians while still admitting a good deal of reciprocity. It is a well-considered solution to the puzzle about how to speak of social relations in a society during a period of transition, a period in which there arc many aspects of capitalism, yet no clearly defined industrial bourgeoisie or wage labour. For Thompson, class only becomes a relevant category after the 1790s. Theoretically, this 'field of force' model in which the patricians and plebeians form two poles with mutual influences and powers, is fairly elegant and flexible, able to incorporate a large number of counter examples and trends while still asserting its basic emphases. It is a model difficult to criticize without posing a detailed alternative synthesis of the historical material; nonetheless some of the claims might be questioned in passing. Thompson's central claims are the identification of a category of people as 'plebeian* and then the ascription to them of a conservative consciousness, wanting to maintain custom rather than launch oft revolutionary overthrow of the ruling class. The category plebeian