by
Janet Lacey.
This is part of a compilation of articles that have appeared
in the "Mercurius Politicus", which is the Regimental
newsletter of Sgt. Maj. Gen. James Carr, hys Regiment of Foote.
Carr's Regiment are the oldest continuing Parliamentarian
Regiment in the Sealed Knot. The "Mercurius Politicus"
has been issued for over 25 years. Further details can be
obtained from the Editor, Pete Minall 100544,334@compuserve.com.
Full credit is given to both the author, Janet Lacey and to
the Mercurius Politicus.
Enjoy.
Introduction...
In order to keep in with our beloved
Editor and to pass a couple of empty hours (unusually) one
evening, I came up with the idea of writing an article on
witchcraft in the seventeenth century. I decided to do a
bit of research and found after a few months (on and off)
of ploughing through my books, I had enough for a series
of articles instead of just one. Hopefully, these will be
of interest to you and will put me in good standing with
our Editor.
I would like to put into writing a
couple of points which may sound daft but I feel need to
be said. First, reading these articles will not turn you
or your children into Satanists. I believe that this is
a nineteenth century invention and so has no real connection
with the madness that prevailed in earlier centuries. Secondly,
I am not including instructions on how to become a witch.
What I am concentrating on is an historical fact which is
over 300 years old. It happened, but like slavery, it is
a subject that is considered taboo. However, I feel it is
time to bring it out into the open. Having said this though
if you really don't want to read more, then don't.
Despite the amount of information held
in what follows, it is based on a very limited library on
the subject. For this reason, I would point out that some
could be wrong or not fully explored or explained. Obviously
there is far more available in other books as well as other
views on the subject. Also, it would appear that there is
still a lot of research into original documents that has
yet to be carried out and put into print. This really is
the tip of the tip of the iceberg.So how do we see a witch?
A hag, 'old, lame, blear eyed, pale, foul and full of wrinkles,
pretty comprehensive really, and not unlike her portrayal
today, yet this description comes from Reginald Scot, who
wrote at the end of the sixteenth century. Despite the majority
view at the time, there were those few voices of reason,
and Reginald Scot was one of them. We all see the witch
as an old woman and, probably, this was the case. However,
men, women and children were accused, tried and executed.
They could be poor or middleclass or rich. It touched everyone
no matter what their background. Despite the general belief
today, they were usually hanged, burning only being employed
as a means of despatch when treason was involved (except
Scotland). Many died inprison, long before they felt the
hangmans noose. In these articles, I will be attempting
to give a brief overall view, including an insight into
who was seen as being a "witch", the practices
she may have undertaken and the society in which she lived.
There are the effects of the law and the Church on the basic
accusation or "crime" and the writers from the
period when the witch craze was at it's height. The trials
are interesting and theses are looked at generally and in
some cases are included as an insight, including the infamous
Pendle one of 1612. There were the frauds that helped many
to see that this madness was just that - a make believe.
Finally, there is the declineof the madness. It took a long
time, but finally the voice of reason prevailed and people
sropped the suffering of many innocents. By the end of the
series, I hope I willhave dispelled a few myths and a clearer
picture will have replaced them. Before I finish this introduction,
however, a small taste of the period that may interest you,
especiallyas it occurs during the Civil War.
In 1643, the Parliamentarian army,
under the command of the Earl of Essex, was camped at Newbury.
Some soldiers saw a woman apparantly walking on water, however,
"they could perceive there was a planck or deal overshadowed
with a little shallow water, that she stood upon... turning
and winding it which way she pleased". No doubt she
was a local going about her business as she must have so
many times before. She was seized, pronounced a witch and
the soldiers decided to shoot her, which is when the story
takes a turn into the silly. It seems that she was not to
be killed so easily for "with a deriding and loud laughter
at them, she caught their bullets in her hands and chewed
them". One soldier then took it upon himself to slash
her forehead "as sure method to counteract sorcery
and discharged the pistol underneath her ear, at which she
straight sunk down and died".
A common practise in the seventeenth
century was the issue of pamphlets which can be seen as
the forerunners of modern newspapers. They reported all
sorts of events from local to national interest. One such
pamphlet was printed giving the above story. It was issued
in 1643 by John Hammond, under the title "A Most Certain,
Strange and true Discovery of a Witch". The spelling
incidentally is original (note that the word "true"
is the only one without a capitalised beginning! - ED) The
title page continued with "Being taken by some of the
Parliament forces as she was standing on a small planck
board and sayling it over the River of Newburys".
I can only say that it is an odd little
story and one of many I came across in the course of my
research. It has a mixture of fact and fantasy which seems
typical. Perhaps the soldiers actually made a mistake, thinking
that she floated on the water unaided and only discovered
the "planck" after she was dead. It would therefore
be convenient to invent her reaction to the bullets. However,
we have only the pamphlet to go on and it is not clear if
this is an eye witness account. After this time, the truth,
the real truth, is lost, no doubt forever!
The history of witchcraft in Britain
is decidedly different to that in Europe. Trials here held
aspects that were either rare in European cases or did not
exist there at all. What follows is a closer look at the
way witchcraft played it's part in the individual areas
of Britain.
THE CHANNEL ISLANDS
The first to be considered are the
Channel Islands. Although politically British, their proximity
to France caused their handling of the situation to be decidedly
French and the people probably suffered more. Convictions
in the islands were high and it would seem that Guernsey
was the more fanatical. Torture to extract confessions were
common, even after the sentence of death had been passed.
To top this, the death sentence was always burning, typical
of the European execution practice.
IRELAND
Ireland had a comparitively easy time
with only about half a dozen cases between 1324 and 1711,
the dates of the first and last trials. Except for the first,
they were all Protestants by Protestants. Burning here was
reserved for heretics. The first Irish trial was directed
against Lady Alice Kytler by Bishop Richard de Ledrede,
a Franciscan, who had trained in France. She was, at this
time, married to her fourth husband who had become suddenly
ill. It appears that her step children from her marriages
disliked both her and her son from her first marriage, William
Outlaw. There were a variety of charges lodged against her
and her son, which very obviously reflected European influences
probably from the Bishop. After a battle of sorts between
Lady Alice and the Bishop, she returned to England, leaving
her son in prison. Meanwhile, her maid was used as a scapegoat.
She was flogged six times, before confessing to anything,
was excommunicated then burned alive on January 3rd 1324
in Kilkenny.
The last Irish trial was on 31st March
1711 at Carrickfergus, lasting from 6am 'till 2pm. A girl
had accused certain women of giving her fits and thus being
witches. The women attended church regularly and could repeat
the Lord's Prayer perfectly, which would normally have ruled
them out as witches. However, the two judges disagreed about
their innocence and the jury declared them guilty. Their
punishment was a year in prison and four appearances in
the stocks emphasising the change in punishment over the
centuries.
WALES
Wales seems to have totally escaped
the witch persecutions. Christianity was slow to spread
through the country so the doctrines of the church had less
of an influence there. When William took the country in
1066, Wales was not parcelled out as England was, and clear
borders between the countries were established. The border
Lords gradually took more land from Wales and feudalism
lasted longer than in England. In the Thirteenth Century
the Black Death decimated the population leaving isolated
pockets of occupation. Also there were fewer monasteries
giving food, shelter and medicine to those who needed it,
the cunning folk or white witches were, therefore, far more
important in a Welsh community than in it's English counterpart.
The Roman Catholic faith held sway
in Wales even after Henry VIII had passed his two Acts of
Union in 1536 and 1542, something that the Welsh had asked
for themselves. During Elizabeth's reign, a Welsh Bible
was printed but there were omissions and mistranslations
due to the nature of the Welsh language. For example, the
word "gwrach" which in English means "an
old woman" or a "hag", was used instead of
"witch". To the English, sorcerors were were seen
as evil beings but were seen by the Welsh as benign figures,
like that of Merlin. Thus the influence of the English translations
did not exist in Wales, even when English words were added,
to fill the gaps.
SCOTLAND
Scotland, no doubt due to it's ties
with France in particular, seems to have taken a very tough
line. As early as the Sixth Century, it was law to burn
anyone accused of witchcraft or it's associated practices.
Mary, Queen of Scots, had spent many years in France and
therefore it was these influences that she brought back
on her return to her native country. Combined with this,
was the Protestant threat, so the Act of 1653 was passed.
In this Act, the crime of witchcraft warranted the death
penalty as it was heretical. Burning was once again the
method of execution.
Her son, James VI, was a strong Calvinist,
and if anything, the Protestant influence on the crime was
harsher than ever. It has to be remembered that James himself
had been the subject of bewitchment when the North Berwick
witches had apparantly attempted to shipwreck him on his
return to Scotland with his bride. This had induced him
to deal harshly with such accusations allowing torture to
be used to obtain confessions. He even wrote a book, the
"Demonologie", decrying witches out of hand. However,
after his succession to the English throne, his attitudes
were to change quitedramatically, almost to the point of
disbelief.
ENGLAND
From before the Norman conquest, the
witch had a relatively easy time in England. The major penalty
for bewitching someone, when death was not involved, seems
to have been a pennance at best through to banishment at
worst. Only when the crime involved the death of the victim,
did the death penalty raise it's ugly head. The witches
could opt to undertake trial by ordeal. There were a variety
that included that by fire, where burns had to heal quickly,
and water, the forerunnerof the later "swimming".
Another involved the swallowing of a piece of bread or a
specially made cake and, if the accused choked, then he/she
was guilty. It is said that this is how the Earl Godwin
died.
During the Middle Ages, the main witchcraft
accusations and trials which involved the death penalty
were made at the Nobility. In 1324, twenty seven were charged
at Coventry with employing two necromancers to murder Edward
I In England the church was losing it's control over so
many areas and this was the first secular witchcraft trial,
all previous ones having been ecclesiastical. In later years
other notables such as Eleanor Cobham, the Duchess of Gloucester,
(Henry VI), the Duke of Bedford (1748) and Morton and Richmond
(1483) were acused of witchcraft and sorcery or employing
a witch to help in the killing of the ruling monarch. All
such cases had political overtones and were therefore treasonous,
a greater crime than witchraft.Henry VIII introduced a Statute
in 1542 which was the first bill against witchcraft in modern
England. It covered such practices as divination for precious
metals, simple maleficia, sympathetic magic (ie, the use
of waxen images) or the use of rings or bottles to find
buried treasure. There was no mention of a pact with the
devil, and white witches seem to have been exempt. However,
it did make all crimes connected with witchcraft, whether
major or minor, into felonies and therefore punishable by
death.
Henry was one of the many who used
the crimes as a means to his own ends. Anne Boleyn and Wolsey
were two who suffered from such accusations, during his
reign. Yet Henry's son, Edward VI, changed all this by passing
a general bill which repealed the earlier statutes. Wilful
killing by poison remained a felony but predicting the Monarch's
death no longer carried the death penalty.Mary I, concentrated
more on Protestants than witches, so nothing significant
happened during her reign. Under Elizabeth, however, a new
interest grew and in December 1547, a statute was introduced
that returned to Henry's earlier bill. It was welcomed by
many and included the death sentence for murder and sorcery.
Imprisonment covered non fatal witchcraft and searching
for treasure, whilst a second offence, for divination, attempted
murder, or unlawful love, meant that the perpatrators property
was forfeit. Although it included the devil as a factor,
witches had to face their accusers and some attempt was
made to sift the charges against them.
So we return to James VI of Scotland
and I of England. Due to his earlier brushes, James was
definately anti-witch when he came to the English throne.
He ensured that his book was published here quite soon and
had another statute passed in 1604 which emphasised the
pact with the devil. Both the book and the statute were
used in later trials bringing in harsher penalties for a
wider range of malefica. In the statute at least, he was
backed by some of the most learned men in England, like
the Earl of Northumberland, the Bishop of Lincoln and the
Attorney General.
Despite the influence of these and
others, a more sceptical attitude crept through the court
during James' reign. His personal physician, Dr Harvey and
Francis Bacon were just two to whom James listened. Added
to this was the fact that James himself became involved
in witch trials that were proved false and fraudulent. At
first James became indifferent but finally denied witchcraft
as he had previously seen it. He read a wider range of books
on the subject, including those which were more moderate.
Perhaps he even read Reginald Scot's work which he had banned
in 1603. It is interesting to note that, during the last
9 years of James reign, only 5 executions took place.
The statute remained during Charles's
reign but, like his father, Charles saw several fraudulent
cases so it was largely ignored. However, it came to the
fore once again during the Commonwealth. During the latter
half of the Seventeenth Century the interest died due to
the changes in society. Finally the statute was repealed
in 1736. In Ireland, the earlier statute of 1587 which had
remained in force there was repealed in 1821. However, it
is still possible for a fortune teller to be prosecuted
for pretending to be a witch, even today.
This article is from the Mercurius
Politicus, which is the Newsletter of Sgt. Maj. Generalle
James Carr, hys Regiment of Foote. Carr's Regiment is one
of the oldest Parliamentarian re-enactment Regiments, has
been active within the Sealed Knot since 1974.
|