Rural England was as superstitious as it was religious in Tudor times, when a resurgance of interest in witchcraft reared it's ugly head. Henry VIII enacted the first ever English law against witchcraft in 1542. The law stated that if anyone "should use, devise, practice or exercise... any invocations or conjurations of spirits, witchcrafts, enchantments or sorceries, to find money or treasure, or to waste, consume or destroy any person, or dig up or pull down any cross... (they will suffer) such pains of death, loss of fortunes of their lands, tenants, goods and chattels, as in the case of felony, and lose priviledge of the clergy and sanctuary."
In 1563, during Elizabeth's reign, Parliment passed a similiar but wider act. Most action was taken by villagers. The normal punishment was a dunking stool, meaning they were tied to a stool and dunked in the water, often until they drowned. However if they survived the ordeal, they were usually deemed to be innocent of the charges. The stocks were also a common punishment, and another form of torture.
The first major witchcraft trial took place in Clemsford, in 1566, three years after the passing of Elizabeth's statute. This sparked a wave of witchcraft in Essex and further trials and hangings took place there a few yearls later. Heresay evidence was eagely accepted. Some victims were hanged on their own confessions without any other evidence supporting the claim.
In 1584, during Queen Elizabeth's reing, Reginald Scot published "The Discoverie of Witchcraft", which was sceptical observations about witchhunts.
Witchhunts reached a peak in Stuart's reign in the 17th Century, when the self-appointed "witchfinder-general', Matthew Hopkins, came to fame. Or would that be to infamy?
Source: English Life in Tudor Times by Roger Hart
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 11
I believe the power machine was in well oiled motion here. Those who judged held the balance of life and death for each of accused in the palms of their sweaty, over excited hands. It made them feel important in their day. Perhaps they also thought it good for future political position. "Hi, remember me, you should elect me because I'm the guy that rid your town of all of those nasty witches and therefore eased your suffering and ensured your safety."
I think boredom was another reason for this terrible farce and I think it also perpetuated it. It gave the townsfolk excitement in their ordinary lives. It was a feast for gossip. The excitement also carried into the fear factor. They probably all experienced a massive adrenaline rush much like the one people get by watching scary horror movies. There is scientific proof that people can become adrenaline junkies. I'm sure it had a much stronger effect in the days where everything was so mundane and adrenaline was used very little.
There were those townsfolk who relished the limelight and enjoyed their little bids for power. Some who testified actually enjoyed the effect of their testimony. It gave them a a power rush of self-importance when they realized that they could awe with their accusations. For some, it was their ticket to respect in the community even if it was fueled by the fear of others.
Christian opposition to church leaders that strayed from the word of God was one of them.
People that were different from others, people that actually were witches, some women that tried to help neighbors with herbal medicines.
Some women that opposed their spouse and tried to run away from abusive marriages.
You name it, it happened.
The judicial system in history was hardly fair on any issue, and people wishing for freedom of religion (not from religion) was not any fairer than for witches.
How do we treat various "outsiders" such as gays, Muslims, and non-believers?