Published on BBC s History Extra, 10 December 2014

<http://www.historyextra.com/feature/weird-and-wonderful/pleb-history-word-sparked-
plebgate >

Pleb: a history of the word that sparked plebgate

Brodie Waddell, Lecturer in Early Modern History, Birkbeck, University of London

Ho , i the st e tu , a the o d ple lead to a p o i e t MP esig i g his

government post and to a £2 million libel lawsuit? The recent conclusion of the ple gate
saga has reminded us that this seemingly obsolete term of social description still has bite,
but why?

The o d has its o igi i lassi al Lati , he ple s as a te fo the citizens of Rome, as
opposed to the uli g pat i ia elite. Of course, it would have been unknown to the vast
majority of population of Roman Britain, because they did not speak Latin. The same was
true in the medieval period, when the term was rare even among the elite who could read
and speak Latin. Ple s as o asio all used i Lati te ts English writers to denote the
people of a pa ish f o the th e tu o a ds. However, when the powerful referred
to o di a people, the e e u h o e likel to use te s like populus , usti i ,
illite ati , idiotae o si pli es . I othe o ds, ple s as ot used e ofte a d ea l
always in a rather restricted ecclesiastical sense.

By the 16th and 17th centuries, variants of the word were known and used by more than a
few English authors. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, it was in this period that the
o ds ple eia fi st e o ded i , ple e a d ple s all joi ed the
E glish la guage as a s of des i i g the o o people , i o t ast to the o ility. The
ple eia as e ui ale t to a e a ik aftis a . o a Yeo a . He e,
as Shakespeare suggests in Coriolanus, ple eia s e e fust , hu g a d eastl . Poets
ote i sulti gl of the giddie la ou i g of Ple s a d Joseph Hall, i his Apologie
of the Church of England (1610) attacking the radical Brownist sect, poked fun at the idea
that e e ple eia a tifi e hath po e to ele t a d o dai e [ i iste s] e tue of his
Ch istia p ofessio . Pe haps the ost p o i e t dis ussio of these te s a e f o Si
Thomas Elyot in The Boke named the Governour, a well-known work of political philosophy
pu lished i . El ot offe ed a e detailed disse tio of the otio of a o o eal
a d, alo g the a , a al sed the o d ple s :
Plebs in englisshe, is called the communaltie, whiche signifieth onely the multytude,
wherin be conteyned the base & vulgare inhabitantes, not avaunced to any honour
or dignitie: whiche is also used in our dayly communication, for in the citie of
London, and other cities, they that be none aldermen, or sheriffes, be called
communers. And in the countrey, at a sessions, or other assembly, if no gentyll men
be there at, the sayinge is, that there was none but the communaltye, whiche
proueth, in myne opinion, that Plebs in latine, is in englishe communaltie: and Plebeij
be communers.
So the ple s e e the o u altie , the ult tude a d the ase & ulga this ti e.
Indeed, they were essentially anyone who lacked a title or office.
As the quotations above suggest, it was not a term of endearment. Yet, in addition to being
insulting, it was also a term that would have only been used by a tiny elite. As the passages
from Thomas Elyot and Coriolanus show, this vocabulary was first and foremost a product of
Lati athe tha E glish. Ple a d its a ious derivations occurred relatively often in books
of the time, but most frequently by far in works written in Latin, translated from Latin,
quoting in Latin, or referring directly to classical history. It was almost entirely absent from
more popular texts such as street ballads or cheap pamphlets. Even in the letters of learned
gentlemen it seems to have been a ishi gl a e. I e e e fou d the ple s o ple eia s
i the a hu d eds of lette s a d go e e t epo ts that I e ead o e the ea s. So, I
feel fairly confident saying that such terms were simply not part of the language used by
people at the time, except by scholars and poets trying to show off their classical education.

This i gs us ple gate . The abbreviated version - ple - used by Andrew Mitchell seems
to have been an invention of the late 18th century. It did not appear in 16th and 17th
century texts except in Latin passages, and the Oxford English Dictionary records its first
example in 1795. It is, by this time, derogatory Westminster School slang fo the so of a
t ades a .

Ple , then, has always been a word of sneering condescension. The English language has
long been rich with words to describe ordinary men and women – the o o s , the
people , a d, ost e e tl , the o ki g lass . These a e o ds that ost people
u de stood a d ould e happ to ide tif ith. A plebeian , o the othe ha d, would
al ost e tai l ha e e e hea d of the ple s a d ould defi itely never use such a term
to describe themselves. It was a word owned by the sort of men who went to elite schools
and held great sums of wealth, invariably implying inferiority. It is thanks to this unpleasant
history that it still retains the power to insult.