Habent sua fata libelli - Truman State University Press · Dorothy Jennings: mother of Elizabeth...

Habent sua fata libelli

Early Modern Studies SeriesGeneral Editor

Michael WolfeQueens College, CUNY

Editorial Board of Early Modern StudiesElaine Beilin

Framingham State College

Christopher CelenzaJohns Hopkins University

Barbara B. DiefendorfBoston University

Paula FindlenStanford University

Scott H. HendrixPrinceton Theological Seminary

Jane Campbell HutchisonUniversity of Wisconsin– Madison

Mary B. McKinleyUniversity of Virginia

Raymond A. MentzerUniversity of Iowa

Robert V. SchnuckerTruman State University, Emeritus

Nicholas TerpstraUniversity of Toronto

Margo ToddUniversity of Pennsylvania

James TracyUniversity of Minnesota

Merry Wiesner- HanksUniversity of Wisconsin– Milwaukee

BeingBewitched-Uszkalo.indb 2 6/15/17 9:03 AM

Early Modern Studies 20Truman State University Press

Kirksville, Missouri


Copyright © 2017 Kirsten Uszkalo / Truman State University Press, Kirksville, Missouri, 63501All rights reservedtsup.truman.edu

Cover art: A little girl stands in a room working with a needle and thread. Etching by Bou-lard the younger (1852– 1927) after Laura Alma Tadema. Wellcome Library, London (ICV No. 39360), Creative Commons License.Cover design: Teresa Wheeler

Library of Congress Cataloging- in- Publication Data

Names: Uszkalo, Kirsten C., 1973– author.Title: Being bewitched : a true tale of madness, witchcraft, and property development gone wrong / Kirsten C. Uszkalo.Description: Kirksville, MO : Truman State University Press, 2017. | Series: Early modern studies ; 20 | Includes bibliographical references and index.Identifiers: LCCN 2016048481 (print) | LCCN 2017003685 (ebook) | ISBN 9781612481654 (library binding : alk. paper) | ISBN 9781612481661Subjects: LCSH: Witchcraft—England—London—History—17th century. | Jennings, Elizabeth, active 1622.Classification: LCC BF1581 .Z7 2017 (print) | LCC BF1581 (ebook) | DDC 133.4/30942109032—ººdc23LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2016048481

No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any format by any means with-out written permission from the publisher.

The paper in this publication meets or exceeds the minimum requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences— Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48– 1992.


Soo at this end of that Booke the Dr. questions relating to the nature of this Disease; & how to ease hir; and whither she were bewitched, or only troubled with the Epilipsie of the Mother.

—Elias Ashmole, Autograph commentary on BL MS 36674 (1690)


G G

vii

ContentsList of Illustrations | xPrincipal Dramatis Personæ | xiGenealogical Charts | xvMaps | xixChronology | xxiIntroduction: “My mother sawe her in the kitchin” | 1

Provenance and Pattern

Chapter 1: The Background: Landed Power, Lunacy, and Libraries | 16Power in the LandThe Lunatic LordBeing in Thistleworth

Chapter 2: Blood Evidence: Sickness in the Blood | 34Summoning Simeon FoxeMentioning Margaret Russell

Chapter 3: Comparables: Familial Witchcraft | 51Scandalized CecilsBad Manners

Chapter 4: Models and Accusations for Being Bewitched | 67Dazzling DemoniacsPreternatural Authority

Chapter 5: Tensions: Prohibitions and Projects | 87Lawmen and Long AcreLangford, Churchill, Fenlands


Gviii Contents

Chapter 6: Tensions: Magics and Medicines | 107Gunpowder AlleyBlack and White CourtClerkenwell and NewgateThe Female Physician

Chapter 7: The New Suspect: The Apothecary | 129The House of HigginsPiccadillies and Piccadilly

Chapter 8: Witnesses and Persons of Interest, Bedside & Barside | 149Frequent VisitorsOrdinary Visitors

Chapter 9: Wrap Up: The Final Expert Assessment | 164Richard Napier

Chapter 10: Post- bewitchment: Elizabeth Jenyns of St. Mary le Savoy | 172“East, west, north and south, all these lye”

Conclusion: “They had power over all them” | 180Appendix 1: “Of Elizabeth Jennings being bewitched,” 1622 | 187Appendix 2: Indictments, 27 October 1616 and

3 December 1616 | 195Appendix 3: Napier on Elizabeth Jennings, 1622 | 198Appendix 4: Napier on Bulbeck, Arpe,

and Latch, 1623 | 200Appendix 5: John Latch’s Signature, 1620, 1622 | 202Bibliography | 203Index | 225About the Author | 231


G G

ix

IllustrationsA. Map A: Detail of John Roque, Map of London, 1746, showing Marga-

ret Russell’s area of activity. Courtesy of the Motco Project, Guild-ford, UK (www.motco.com). | xx

B. Map B: Detail of John Roque, Map of London, 1746, showing devel-opment areas in vicinity of Piccadilly (Higgins/Baker family), Long Acre (William Slingsby and Thomas Cecil), and the Strand. Courtesy of the Motco Project, Guildford, UK (www.motco.com). | xxi

1. Detail of from Andrew Dury & John Andrews, A Topographical Map of Hertfordshire, 1766 (Reprint, London, 1782), showing the location of Saundridge in Hertfordshire. Courtesy of Bibliothèque nationale de France, département Cartes et plans, GE DD- 2987 (2220 B, 1– 9). | 19

2. Holywell House, Hertfordshire, from John Britton, The Beauties of England and Wales or Original Delineations Topographical, Historical and Descriptive of each County Embellished with Engravings, vol. 9 (Hertfordshire by London, 1807). | 21

3. The Jennings family’s coat of arms, from John Burke, A Genealogical and Heraldic History of the Commoners of Great Britain and Ireland, vol. 3 (London: R. Bentley, 1836), page 582. | 22

4. The Parish Church of St. Helen, Ainderby Steeple. Photo by Kreuzsch-nabel, 2013. Wikimedia Commons/GNU Free Documentation License. | 27

5. Former rectory, Congresbury © Copyright Derek Harper and licensed for reuse under the Creative Commons License. | 28


Gx Illustrations

6. Syon House (present day). Photo by Maxwell Hamilton, 2009. Wiki-media Commons/Creative Commons License. | 32

7. The Coat of Arms for the College of Physicians, ca. 1546, Lasdun Building, Regent’s Park. From History of Medicine Topographical Database/Creative Commons License. | 43

8. The Latch family crest, signaling John Latch’s work on the Fenlands drainage project. | 101

9. The Latch Monument in Churchill, purportedly representing John Latch and Sarah Latch (or Dorothy Jennings) and their children. Image courtesy of Chris Lee. | 103

10. Either Sarah Latch or Dorothy Jennings, detail of the Latch Monu-ment. Image courtesy of Chris Lee. | 104

11. Newgate, from Old London Illustrated: A Series of Drawings by the late H. W. Brewer, illustrating London in the XVIth century . . . (London: The Builder, 1921). | 119

12. Coat of Arms for the Society of Apothecaries, ca. 1620, from C. R. B. Barrett, The History of the Society of Apothecaries of London (London: Elliot Stock, 1903). | 132

13. Queen’s Chapel of the Savoy: A Royal Peculiar. Photo by Neddyseadragon, 2007. Wikimedia Commons/GNU Free Documen-tation License. | 174

14. John Latch’s signatures, from the Records of the Exchequer, and its related bodies, with those of the Office of First Fruits and Tenths, and the Court of Augmentations 18 James I (1620– 1621). | 202


G G

xi

Principal Dramatis PersonæJennings FamilyElizabeth Jennings: bewitched or hysterical thirteen- year- old daughter of

John Jennings and Dorothy (Bulbeck) Jennings, stepdaughter to John Latch; accused Margaret Russell (and three others) of witchcraft

Dorothy Jennings: mother of Elizabeth and Thomas Latch (and others), wife of John Jennings, then of John Latch, daughter of Thomas Bul-beck and Ursula (Grey) Bulbeck

John Jennings: “the Lunatic Lord,” father to Elizabeth and John JenningsThomas Jennings: brother to Elizabeth, stepbrother to Franke, son of

John Latch and Dorothy Jennings; later business partner to John Latch

John Latch: stepfather to Elizabeth and Thomas and father to Franke, sec-ond husband to Dorothy Jennings, later business partner of Thomas Jennings

Franke Latch: daughter of Dorothy Jennings and John Latch, stepsister to Elizabeth and Thomas Latch

Cecil FamilyRobert Cecil: 1st Earl of Salisbury, half brother to Thomas Cecil; watched

over the division of the Jennings estateThomas Cecil: 1st Earl of Exeter, husband to Frances Brydges, father of

William, Elizabeth, and Georgi- AnneFrances Brydges: second wife of Thomas Cecil, mother of Georgi- Anne;

accused of witchcraft by her daughter- in- law Elizabeth (Brydges) Cecil


Gxii Principal Dramatis Personæ

Georgi- Anne Cecil: daughter of Thomas Cecil and Frances Brydges; died from phlebotomy

Higgins FamilyStephen Higgins: apothecary, master to Nicholas Culpeper; physician to

Mary Gargrave and Robert Cecil; builder; fought with and accused by Russell of bewitching the Jennings/Latch home

Mary Higgins (the elder): wife of Stephen Higgins; made comment about Jennings/Latch family not able to prosper because of the fallout of ongoing feud between families

Arnold Higgins: son of Stephen Higgins; builder; fought with Jennings/Latch family

Mary Higgins (the younger): daughter of Stephen Higgins; wife of devel-oper Robert Baker

Robert Baker: husband to Mary Higgins Jr.; prosperous tailor; popular-ized piccadilles; builder

Goodcole FamilyAnne Goodcole: female physician; previously prescribed Elizabeth medi-

cine; had knowledge of conflict between Higgins and Jennings house; wife of Henry Goodcole

Henry Goodcole: author of famous witch text; regular visitor at Newgate Prison; led pseudo- legal examination of Russell; husband of Anne Goodcole

Frances Ashton: female physician; possibly had knowledge of conflict between Higgins and Jennings houses; sister of Anne Goodcole

Medical TeamSimeon Foxe: aka Doctor Foxe; physician, primary caregiver to Elizabeth;

later president of the Royal College of PhysiciansRichard Napier: astrological- physician; later treated Elizabeth, John

Latch, Franke LatchWilliam Giddings: a surgeon named as witness to Elizabeth’s accusation

against Russell


GxiiiPrincipal Dramatis Personæ

ExaminersWilliam Slingsby: justice, developer; examined Russell, Anne and Henry

Goodcole, and Frances AshtonThomas Fowler: Baron of Islington; justice, developer; husband of Lady

Elizabeth Fowler and father of Jane Fowler (and ten others); examined Russell, Anne and Henry Goodcole, and Frances Ashton

Thomas Bates: aka Doctor Bates, apothecary; examined Russell, Anne and Henry Goodcole, and Frances Ashton

WitchesMargaret Russell: aka Countess; accused witch, frequent visitor; impris-

oned, questioned by Slingsby, Fowler, Bates, and Goodcoles; center of female medical/spiritual knowledge network

Jane Flower: accused witch, may be Jane Fowler, wife of Sir Thomas Fowler Sr. or daughter of Sir Thomas Fowler Jr.; possible reference to Lincolnshire witches

Katharine Stubbs: accused witch, possible reference to A Crystal Glass for Christian Women (1591)

Nan Wood: accused witch, possibly Agnes Wood

WitnessesElizabeth Arpe: aka Nan Arpe, a neighbor; witness to onset of Elizabeth’s

bewitchment and her continued sickness; patient of Richard NapierMary Gargrave: former maid of honor to Queen Anne; witness to Eliza-

beth’s bewitchment and Mary Higgins’s threat to the JenningsKatharine Percy: a witness to Elizabeth’s accusations against RussellFaith Saxton: a witness to Elizabeth’s accusations against RussellAgnes Faulkner: a servant who acted as a witness to Elizabeth’s accusa-

tions against RussellAnne Bradborne: a witness to Elizabeth’s accusations against RussellKatharine Browne: a servant, witness to Elizabeth’s accusations against

Russell


Gxv==

m. 1 ==

m. 2 ==

==

==

==

==

==

==

==

==

==

Ral

ph

Row

let E

sq.

d. 1

543

Thom

as

Skip

with

Joan

Sk

ipw

ithD

orot

hy

Bow

les

Dor

othy

Mar

gare

t C

ooke

Sir R

alph

R

owle

tc.

151

3–15

58

Ral

ph

Jenn

ings

Ral

ph

Jenn

ings

Joan

Br

onne

cker

Will

iam

Sk

ipw

ith

Eliz

abet

h

m. 1 ==

m. 2 ==

m. 2 ==

Dor

othy

B

ulbe

ckSi

r Joh

n Je

nnin

gsJo

hn

Latc

hA

nne

Bron

neck

eran

d 6

othe

r ch

ildre

nTh

omas

Je

nnin

gs

Sir J

ohn

Jenn

ings

d. 1

612

Alic

e Sp

ence

rEL

IZA

BET

H

JEN

NIN

GS

Thom

as

Jenn

ings

Fran

ke an

d 2

or m

ore o

ther

ch

ildre

n

Fran

ces

Hill

Vere

Je

nnni

ngs

Rob

ert

Jenn

ings

Sara

h La

tch

Ann

Je

nnin

gsJo

hn

Jenn

ings

Fran

ces

Thor

nhur

stTh

omas

Je

nnin

gsEl

izab

eth

Hill

Phili

p Je

nnin

gsR

alph

Je

nnin

gsR

oger

Je

nnin

gsG

eorg

e Je

nnin

gsJa

mes

Je

nnin

gsR

icha

rd

Jenn

ings

d. 1

619-

1668

Sara

h, C

ount

ess

of M

arlb

orou

ghc.

1660

–174

4

Barb

ara

Grifi

thSi

r G.

Ham

ilton

Fran

ces

Jenn

ings

c. 16

47–1

730

Abi

gail

Mas

ham

Baro

ness

Mas

ham

Gra

ce

Jenn

ings

Vera

Ba

lmer

Jenn

ings

Fam

ily

* Dup

licat

e re

fere

nce

on a

noth

er fa

mily

tree

.

*

*


GxviG

eorg

e Man

ners

11th

Bar

on d

eRos

c. 14

70–1

513

Thom

as M

anne

rs1s

t Ear

l of R

utla

ndc.

1488

–154

3

Hen

ry M

anne

rs2n

d Ea

rl of

Rut

land

c. 15

16–1

563

Brid

get

Mor

rison

Mar

gare

t N

evill

ed.

155

9

m. 2 ==

m.1

536

==

==

m.1

591

==m

.158

9==

====

m. 1 ==

m.1

620

==

m. 2 ==

Edw

ard

Man

ners

3rd

Earl

of R

utla

ndc.

1549

–158

7

John

Man

ners

4th

Earl

of R

utla

ndc.

1559

–158

8

Isab

el

Hol

croft

Will

iam

Cec

il2n

d Ea

rl E

xete

rc.

156

6–16

40

Eliz

abet

h La

kem

. 161

5

Will

iam

Cec

il17

th B

aron

de R

osc.

1590

–162

7

Lady

Ann

e C

ecil

m. 1

629

Lady

Eliz

abet

h C

ecil

d. 1

672

Lady

Dia

na

Cec

ild.

165

8

Eliz

abet

h D

rury

Lad

y Eliz

abet

h M

anne

rs16

th B

aron

ess d

e R

osc.

157

5–15

91

Eliz

abet

h C

harlt

on

Fran

cis M

anne

rs6t

h Ea

rl R

utla

nd8t

h Ba

ron

de R

osc.

1578

–163

2

Cec

ily T

ufton

m. 1

608

Hen

ry

Man

ners

d. 1

613

Fran

cis

Man

ners

d. 1

620

and

8 ot

hers

Rog

er M

anne

rs5t

h Ea

rl R

utla

ndc.1

576–

1612

Fran

ces K

nyve

tm

. 160

2d.

160

5

Kat

herin

e Man

ners

19th

Bar

ones

s de R

osd.

164

9

Geo

rge

Vill

iers

Duk

e of

Buc

king

ham

c. 1

592–

1628

Eliz

abet

h M

anne

rsc.

1555

–159

0

Fran

cis R

usse

ll2n

d Ea

rl Be

dfor

dc.

1527

–158

5

Cec

il Fa

mily

Mat

erna

l

* Dup

licat

e re

fere

nce

on a

noth

er fa

mily

tree

.

*

*

*


Gxvii

Dor

othy

N

evill

ec.

1548

–160

9

m.1

591

==

Lady

Dia

na

Cec

ild.

165

8

m. 2 ==

m. 1 ==

Thom

as C

ecil

1st E

arl E

xete

rc.

1542

–162

2

Fran

ces

Bryd

ges

c. 15

80–1

663

Rob

ert C

ecil

1st E

arl S

alisb

ury

c. 15

63–1

612

==

m. 1 ==

m.1

598

==

m. 2 ==

m.1

545

==m

. 2 ==m

. 1 ==m

. 1 ==

==

m.1

617

==

m.1

589

==W

illia

m C

ecil

2nd

Earl

Ext

erc.

156

6–16

40

Eliz

abet

h La

kem

. 161

5

Will

iam

Cec

il17

th B

aron

de R

osc.

1590

–162

7

Lady

Ann

e C

ecil

Lady

Eliz

abet

h C

ecil

d. 1

672

Fran

ces C

oke

c. 15

99–1

645

John

Vill

iers

1st V

isco

unt B

urbe

ckc.

159

1–16

58

Eliz

abet

h Sl

ings

byd.

169

6

Eliz

abet

h C

oke

Mar

y C

lark

d. 1

543

Dor

othy

Bo

wle

s

Ant

hony

C

ooke

Will

iam

Cec

il1s

t Bar

on B

urgh

lyc.

1520

–159

8

Sir R

alph

R

owle

ttc.

151

3–15

71

Ann

e Fi

tzw

illia

m

Mild

red

Coo

kec.

1526

–158

9

Mar

gare

t C

ooke

Geo

rgi-A

nne

Cec

ilc.

1616

–162

1

and

9 ot

her

child

ren

Eliz

abet

h C

ecil

c. 15

78–1

646

Sir E

dwar

d C

oke

c. 15

52–1

634

Sir W

illia

m

New

port

c. 15

40–1

597

Eliz

abet

h D

rury

Lad

y Eliz

abet

h M

anne

rs16

th B

aron

ess d

e R

osc.

157

5–15

91

Cec

il Fa

mily

Pa

tern

al

* Dup

licat

e re

fere

nce

on a

noth

er fa

mily

tree

.

*

*

*

*

*


Gxviii

Mar

y Sl

ye

8 ch

ildre

n

Arn

old

Hig

gins

Eliz

abet

h N

ight

inga

leR

ober

t Ba

ker

Mar

yR

ober

tSa

mue

l

==

m. 2 ==

m. 1 ==

Step

hen

Hig

gins

Mar

yH

iggi

ns F

amily

Vill

iers

Fam

ilySl

ings

by F

amily

Bul

beck

Fam

ily

* Dup

licat

e re

fere

nce

on a

noth

er fa

mily

tree

.

Chr

istop

her

Villi

ers

c. 15

93–1

630

Susa

nc.

1588

–165

2Jo

hn V

illie

rs1s

t Vis

coun

t Bur

beck

c. 1

591–

1658

Geo

rge

Vill

iers

Duk

e of

Buc

king

ham

c. 1

592–

1628==

Mar

y Be

aum

ont

c. 15

70–1

632

Geo

rge V

illie

rsc.

1574

–160

6

*

*

Fran

cis

2 ot

her

siste

rsD

orot

hy

Bul

beck

==Th

omas

Bu

lbec

kU

rsul

a G

rey

*

Eliz

abet

h Sl

ings

bySi

r Will

iam

Sl

ings

byH

enry

Slin

gsby

c. 16

21–1

688

m.1

582

==m

. 2 ==El

izab

eth

Boar

dW

illia

m

Slin

gsby

Mar

agar

et

Mon

tagu

e*


Gxix

Map A: Detail of John Roque, Map of London, 1746, showing Margaret Russell’s area of activity. Courtesy of the Motco Project, Guildford, UK (www.motco.com).

1. Gunpowder Alley2. Newgate Prison3. Black and White Court4. Old Bailey5. Amen Corner6. St. Paul’s Church

1

6

53

2

4


Gxx

Map B: Detail of John Roque, Map of London, 1746, showing development areas in vicini-ty of Piccadilly (Higgins/Baker family), Long Acre (William Slingsby and Thomas Cecil), and the Strand. Courtesy of the Motco Project, Guildford, UK (www.motco.com).

1. Piccadilly2. Long Acre3. Buckingham Street4. Cecil House5. York House6. St. Mary’s Church7. The Strand

1

2

3

4

5

6

7


G G

xxi

Chronology

27 October 1616: Dorothy Jennings, her mother, Ursula Bulbeck (and eleven others) indicted for unlawful and armed assembly, disturbance of the peace, assaulting of Henry Fisher and James Axtell.

27 October 1616: Having broken down a wall, Stephen and Arnold Higgins, James Axtell, and Henry Fisher are indicted for starting a riot and for misdemeanor on John Latch’s property; given a formal warning that they need to maintain good behavior; they ask for a speedy trial.

3 December 1616: Writ created to summon a jury of twenty- four men in St. Mary Savoy in the Strand for the 3 January 1617 trial of Dorothy Jennings (Latch), Ursula Bulbeck, Samuel Lee, William Whaverley, Robert Houghton, and Robert Gray for trespass and riot.

3 January 1617: Trial; result unknown.Date Unknown: A child of Jennings- Latch union grows sick; Russell visits

Higgins house to see, or arrives with, Mary Gargrave; Mary Higgins makes first ominous prediction that the Jennings “had much wronged them and that it wold come home by them and theirs.”

13 January 1622, Isleworth, London Borough of Hounslow: Elizabeth becomes sick, stops eating meat.

15 February 1622, Isleworth, London Borough of Hounslow: Elizabeth grows sicker and can no longer stand.

19 January 1622, Isleworth, London Borough of Hounslow: Elizabeth begins having fits and “talks idly”; Simeon Foxe comes to treat Eliz-abeth, but takes her back to rooms at Amen Corner in London; her body aches and she sobs incessantly.

28 February 1622 (approx.), Amen Corner, London: Elizabeth’s fits regularize, arriving at midnight and lasting 4 hours. She moans, sighs, complains of severe pain in different parts of her body.


Gxxii Chronology

March 1622 [exact date unknown], Gunpowder Alley, London: Marga-ret Russell visits Mrs. Saxby, a demoniac, seeking help for Elizabeth; Saxby suggests Elizabeth needs a special book and seminary priest.

17 March 1622, Amen Corner, London: Elizabeth experiences severe convulsions resulting in cognitive impairment, memory loss, and numbing of her right side; medical treatment proves counterproduc-tive.

20 April 1622 (Saturday), Amen Corner, London: Elizabeth can only stammer and stutter.

21 April 1622 (Easter Sunday), Amen Corner, London: Elizabeth cannot speak throughout the day; her power of speech returns at night.

22 April 1622 (Easter Monday), Amen Corner, London: Elizabeth expe-riences violent fits twice in twenty- four hours; remains speechless.

23 April 1622 (Tuesday), Amen Corner, London: Diagnostic team debates over three courses of treatment for Elizabeth: oil bath, induce vomiting, or phlebotomy.

24 April 1622 (Wednesday), Amen Corner, London: Physicians induce vomiting, but there is no improvement; they decide to bleed Eliz-abeth; Margaret Russell “the Countess” appears in the MS at this moment, with the dire warning that Georgi- Anne Cecil had been killed by bleeding and Elizabeth might be too.

25 April 1622 (Thursday) 6 am, Amen Corner, London: Elizabeth begins to speak to an apparition of “the Countess” (Russell) during her fit.

25 April 1622 (Thursday), Black and White Court, London: Russell visits Mrs. Dromondby looking for treatment for Elizabeth; she refers her to Anne Goodcole.

25 April 1622 (Thursday), Clerkenwell, London Borough of Islington: Russell visits Frances Ashton and Anne Goodcole in Clerkenwell; Goodcole tells her she had prescribed medicine, but the child would not take it; Goodcole suggested that two of Dorothy Jennings’s chil-dren had died because of a conflict between the Jennings and Higgins houses.

25 April 1622 (Thursday) afternoon, Amen Corner, London: Elizabeth is bled.

25 April 1622 (Thursday) late afternoon, Amen Corner, London: Eliza-beth accuses four witches (Jane Flower, Katharine Stubbs, Countesse, Nan Wood) of bewitching her and her siblings; claims her mother and Nan Arpe saw her bewitchment happen.


GxxiiiChronology

25 April 1622 (Thursday) evening, the Strand, London: Dorothy Jen-nings and John Latch take Margaret Russell to Sir William Slingsby, who examines her.

25 April 1622 (Thursday) midnight, the Strand, London: Slingsby issues a warrant to have Russell committed to Newgate.

26 April 1622 (Friday) 10– 11 am, James the Clerk’s house in the Old Bailey, London: Henry Goodcole et al. have Russell removed from Newgate and interrogate her at James the Clerk’s house in the Old Bailey; Elizabeth suffers severe fits concurrently.

26 April 1622 (Friday) afternoon, James the Clerk’s house in the Old Bailey, London: Thomas Fowler, William Slingsby, and Thomas Bates interrogate Russell; she admits to being interrogated by Goodcole et al. and now claims Frances Ashton, not Anne Goodcole, mentioned the controversy between the Jennings and Higgins houses.

27 April 1622 (Saturday) afternoon, James the Clerk’s house in the Old Bailey, London: Thomas Fowler, William Slingsby, and Thomas Bates interrogate Frances Ashton; she admits to being part of the group who interrogated Russell until she wept, but denied knowledge of Higgins/Jennings feud.

27 April 1622 (Saturday) afternoon, James the Clerk’s house in the Old Bailey, London: Thomas Fowler, William Slingsby, and Thomas Bates interrogate Anne Goodcole, who admits to administering medicines to Elizabeth (and others) denied knowledge of Higgins/Jennings feud.

27 April 1622 (Saturday) afternoon, James the Clerk’s house in the Old Bailey, London: Thomas Fowler, William Slingsby, and Thomas Bates interrogate Henry Goodcole, who admits to interrogating Russell.

30 July 1622, Great Linford, Buckinghamshire: Dorothy Jennings takes Elizabeth and John Latch to see Richard Napier; he reviews her case, determines she will die within six months, but she does not; he reviews Latch’s symptoms; Latch appears to think he is himself bewitched.


G G

1

Introduction

“My mother sawe her in the kitchin”

On 25 April 1622 in an airless bedroom at the College of Physicians Resi-dences at Amen Corner and Paternoster Row in London, a thirteen- year-old girl claws her way back to consciousness. She had spent the previous months swinging between silence and screams. Suddenly, and in a voice only some-times her own, she awakes and commands:

Put Countesse in prison this childe will bee well.If she had bin long agoo all th’other had bin alive.Them she bewitched by a catsticke.Till then I shall lye in great paine.Till then by fitts I shall be in great extremitie [ . . . ]Noo bodie knowse what ayles me within.When she is in prison then I shall bee well, now till then by fittsShe came first of all that eve my mother sawe her in the kitchinAnd Nan Arpe was there.

Nine stunned onlookers— her mother and stepfather, a surgeon and servant, and neighbors and peers— all hear these claims before Elizabeth lapses into mute palsies. They must have been flabbergasted as the reali-zation hit. Badgering, bleeding, and nursing the girl back to health had failed —they had spent weeks arguing and fighting among themselves—they were out of diagnoses and treatments. Suddenly a course of action presented itself, one prognosticated to be successful: imprison the witch and all would be well.


G2 Introduction

Witchcraft made sense as causation and bewitchment as disease— the ghoulish proof had struggled and sighed in front of them for a month. With no other treatment options and the child again suspended in night-marish suffering, they did what the voices told them to do: they took the witch to a justice and sent her to prison.

This book traces the influences needed to build the witchcraft accusa-tion made by Elizabeth Jennings against Margaret Russell. High- reaching political players in London held up this accusation to rigorous scrutiny; it was assessed against the latest medical theories and through painful treat-ments administered by respected practitioners. To understand how they arrived at this allegation, it is important to understand the very particular and peculiar context. Witchcraft was still a legal and medical reality in England at that time. The physician’s examination room that held Elizabeth and the jail cell that held Russell were part of an environment that, at best, could not refute the power of the witch’s curse or the bewitched’s prophetic skills; at worst, in that environment witchcraft was real.

To understand this accusation, we also need to see that it was provoked by the same tensions Elizabeth absorbed to interpret her own disease. It emerged as an evolution of tensions between practitioners of all ilks as med-icine sought to professionalize. It unfolded in a crowded treatment room where conversation between visitors became Elizabeth’s conviction that she was being bewitched.1 We must also come to see that natural and preter-natural sickness did not only overlap in the countryside; as the countryside was slowly being absorbed into London, witchcraft was being wicked into the city.

The story started with a curse in a country kitchen, metastasized inside a medical treatment room, came to a head in a prison, and is ultimately explained by the pressures of unstoppable urban sprawl. This book spins these threads together to weave a larger picture of how the accusation against Margaret Russell happened and whom she, in turn, crooked a finger at. But before we do that, we need to understand how witchcraft happened.

1. In keeping with the particulars of individual cases and accounts, this work uses the terms possession and bewitchment, demoniac and bewitched, broadly and interchangeably, much as they were used at the time of the events described; these terms speak to the intensely emotional embodied spiritual experience under discussion.


G3“My mother sawe her in the kitchin”

***

Witchcraft, like that which Elizabeth allegedly experienced, did not emerge from a single belief structure, although numerous attempts to impose a grid on the messiness of it all were made at the time.2 Nor was witchcraft wholly represented by a specified set of practices or prayers. The cursing, praising, and gloating depicted in witchcraft- related trial documents and accounts was not substantially different from that described in everyday exchanges, where terms like “ould witch” were thrown around with few consequenc-es.3 And although much was made of the witch as the devil’s servant and a familiar spirit’s master, the recounted details of these supernatural deals are unconvincing. The witch was typically depicted as making her pact under duress; its benefits to her were scant and petty.

Still, the witch was seen as part pathetic, part predatory— a victim and an opportunist who used fear rather than kindness to ensure Chris-tian charity. Legally, she was a felon: her modus operandi— curses, magic, and familiars— enabled her to damage, hurt, spread disease, and kill. Spir-itually, she was corrupt: she swore, cursed, thieved, and could not pray. Physically, she was monstrous: her skin numbed, flesh extended into witch’s marks, her body floated, and her eyes stopped shedding tears. Moreover, the witch was almost always female: 80 to 90 percent of the approximately five hundred to one thousand people executed in England as witches were women. Women also acted as local arbiters of witch beliefs; they suffered as victims and mothers of victims and served as witnesses, accusers, and witch- searchers.

Witchcraft was a crime. The early English monarchs, for the most part, put their weight behind stopping it. Under Henry VIII (1541/42, 33 Hen. VIII, c. 8), Elizabeth I (1562/63, 5 Eliz. I, c. 16), and James I (1604, 1 Jas. I, c. 12. 1), those found guilty of using witchcraft as an instrument

2. See, for example, Johann Weyer’s De Praestigiis Daemonum (1563); Reginald Scot’s Discovery of Witches (1584); George Gifford’s A Discourse of the Subtill Practises of Devilles by Witches And Sorcerers (1587) and A Dialogue Concerning Witches and Witchcrafts (1593); and James I of England’s Demonologie (1597, 1616).

3. “March 2, 1617, Information of Charles Irish, taken before Sir George Whitmore, Justice of Peace within the City of London,” in Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, Charles I, 1638– 1639. For a comparison, see John Tonken’s defense against his unknown attacker. He allegedly beseeched his attacker to disclose her identity, but “turning to the People, would say, the Old Witch will neither tell me her Name, nor where she dwells”; Anon., True Account of a Strange and Wonderful Relation of John Tonken, 5.

GG

•


G4 Introduction

of murder would themselves twist and thrash from the noose. These laws, designed to root out elements that tainted the female gender and polluted their homes, gave neighbors and family a language to explain inexplica-ble misfortunes and a means to address unresolved animosity. They were also a way of highlighting the state’s role as the arbiter of justice. Legally and socially authorized ideas about witchcraft worked to make sense of the unwelcome overlap between the natural and preternatural landscape.

These beliefs were not the exclusive purview of children, fools, mel-ancholiacs, and Catholics, as Reginald Scot wrote in his skeptical work, Discovery of Witchcraft (1584). Appearing across age, gender, education, and class divides, these beliefs were sustained by manuscripts like the one that tells the story of Elizabeth Jennings, as well as a myriad of popular pamphlets, sermons, and treaties. These texts were written with an obvi-ous bias, built on a pattern, and went to press with an agenda in mind: to illustrate real- life examples of sensationalized supernatural suffering. They illustrated one critical “truth.” Witchcraft was an event: one with a cause, a result, and a remedy.

Something happened to witchcraft’s victims— something its victims, their families, and their communities attributed to the influence of witches. It was something they felt as an actual experience, endeavored to end, and, sometimes, to avenge. Of course, there was silliness and superstition in some witchcraft accusations. For example, in the trial of Alice Goodridge, Thomas Darling claimed to have been cursed with this unlikely incantation: “Gyp [get lost!] with a mischiefe, fart with a bell: I will goe to heaven, and thou shalt goe to hell.”4 These cases, however, represent a minority in an otherwise strange and sad historical archive. Most accusations gave off a stench of acri-mony and anxiety, the result of recent slights and long-festering suspicions. Witchcraft was often tied to everyday annoyances—trees fell on a still day, beer refused to brew, porridge boiled over. However, at the core of many witchcraft accusations, there was genuine loss.

Witchcraft cost money. Livestock withered and went mad; cargo fell off boats and sunk. These were not insignificant events to those who wit-nessed them or to those who sustained the losses they caused. Those who suffered most were, of course, those who lost the most: the families of the

4. Anon., Most Wonderfull and True Story, of a Certain Witch Named Alice Goodridge of Stapen Hill, 4.


G5“My mother sawe her in the kitchin”

bewitched, the sick and dying, who themselves screamed and panted in torment and fell silent in contorted paralysis.

A number of sick girls like Elizabeth Jennings wept and writhed their way into print by the early seventeenth century. These figures may have suf-fered alone, but they were part of a larger sisterhood of women— prophets, demoniacs, and fantastic fasters— whose experience with pain brought them in close proximity to the preternatural.5 Although technically different, the ways they manifested themselves in the body of the afflicted were identical. The elision between spiritual sickness and physical sickness suggests that becoming bedeviled could originate from within, without, or both; the sick were especially vulnerable to the devil’s machinations. A curse, for instance, could make a person act possessed; a witch’s familiar would be a possessing entity. As victims, the bewitched claimed an authority that allowed them to accuse witches and spirits of tormenting them. In both cases, the vehe-mence of accusations and the sight of their bodies spookily suffering means that they are taken seriously. Vats of ink were pressed onto paper expressing the horrors that harrowed the bewitched.

These witch stories make up part of a literary genre, a series of loosely knit histories where bewitchments were acted out with spirits and carved into flesh, where accusations were spat and screamed, where possession could make you into a quasi- prophet and a quivering fool. Pamphlets recount how eighteen- year- old Anne Myler, for instance, experienced an afternoon onset of bewitchment in 1567. She suffered severe fits during which she could “cast her selfe (her belly being upwarde) into the fourme of a hoope.”6 Demoniac Anne Starkie, one of the Lancashire Seven,7 was treated in 1600 by John Dee, the famous astrologer- magician and con-sultant to the queen, exorcists John Darrell and George More, and the witch Edmond Hartley. She blamed her possession on “a foule ugly man, with a white beard and a great bulch on his brest [breast] as big as a mans head.”8 Allegedly bewitched by her neighbor Elizabeth Jackson in 1603,

5. The physical experiences of the demoniac and the bewitched were so similar that many of Jennings’s contemporaries aligned them in the same way as Mistress Saxby, the demoniac- consultant on the case.

6. Fisher, Copy of a Letter.7. The possessed included five children— Anne Starkie and her brother John, Margaret Hurdman,

Ellinor Hurdman, and Eleanor Holland— and thirty- year- old Jane Ashton and thirty- three- year- old Margaret Byrom.

8. Darrel, True Narration of the Strange and Greuous Vexation by the Devil, of 7. Persons in Lan-cashire, and William Somers of Nottingham, 21.


G G

16

Chapter One

The BackgroundLanded Power, Lunacy, and Libraries

Elizabeth’s biography, as it might have been written before she became bewitched, provides much- needed insight into how and why her story was written. The first part of this book will give a background to Eliz-abeth Jennings, looking at who she was, where she was from, and why that all matters in terms of her being bewitched. She came from a privi-leged and influential but troubled family. Their vast estate, Saundridge, an assuredly astonishing home, was the site of so many deaths that the land itself may have seemed haunted. Whereas her contemporaries might have learned about witchcraft from whispers, Elizabeth, like some well- known demoniacs of her time, may have read about it, studied it, and perhaps modeled her own experience on stories she had read in an estate library. Although she may have had access to the idea of witchcraft, being bewitched does not seem like imaginative play for Elizabeth. She didn’t need to learn or imagine what witchcraft looked like; she saw torment and delirium up close.

In the absence of much detail on her life before her bewitchment, we begin the search for Elizabeth Jennings with the titles and land that mark her place in the peerage. Numerous branches grow on her family tree. Some broke off while verdant. Others rotted off of the trunk. Some vibrant branches radiate today. To search for the history of Elizabeth, one can explore the parcel of land on which her family tree grew: the estate at Saun-dridge. It was there that her family became persons of quality. Although her maternal grandparents fought for her family’s rights, it was from Saundridge that she also lost, with the madness and death of her father, her place in that


G17The Background: Landed Power, Lunacy, and Libraries

peerage. It was a connection that, at least in part, ensured Elizabeth could wield power beyond that sustained by her small and shuddering frame.

The scene later moves from Saundridge to Isleworth. It was in Isleworth that Elizabeth might have seen the face of madness up close, and where we find at least two libraries, those of John Dee and Henry Percy, in either of which Elizabeth might have learned about witches. It was at Isleworth that she claimed to have been bewitched. Witch stories will come to play a crit-ical part of this narrative. Something about the idea of bewitchment made sense to Elizabeth. Perhaps she used the idea of witchcraft to help her make sense of the loss and lunacy she had seen. Perhaps she simply read witch stories as all children do: because it was fun to be frightened. But between Saundridge and Isleworth, between scary stories and a home that echoed with screams, something happened to Elizabeth, something that eventually made her remember being in a kitchen where she was being bewitched.

Power in the Land

How did the Jennings family come to occupy the estate at Saundridge? The estate itself was an old one; a great deal of history happened there before Eliz-abeth suspected she was being bewitched. Saundridge Abbey of St. Albans was founded during the reign of William the Conqueror (ca. 1028–87),1 and was held as part of the properties owned by the Roman Catholic Church. When Henry VIII split from Rome and created the Church of England, he dissolved the monasteries. In 1540, Saundridge was granted to Ralph Rowlet, Esquire, a master of the mint in Henry VIII’s service. The land did not come without a cost, however. It seemed to create short lives and bad blood in the line that leads to Elizabeth. Rowlet survived only three years after receiving Saundridge. His wife, Elizabeth, and his son, also named Ralph Rowlet, inherited the land.2

Edward VI, the king who also made him a justice of the peace, knighted Ralph Rowlet the younger.3 Rowlet married twice and both times he married

1. Saundridge was valued at the rate “ten hides.” A hide was an evaluative sum for property tax evaluation; it had less to do with actual geographic space than with perceived value of the land.The arable land around measured three carcuates in demesne land. Assuming a carcute is about120 acres, this would make Saundridge about 1,560 acres of land.

2. Page, “Parishes: Sandridge.”3. Bindoff. House of Commons, 1598– 1558, 4:224.


G18 Chapter One

well. He first married a woman named Dorothy. When he married his second wife, Margaret Cooke, a lady- in- waiting to the queen, Rowlet also married into a family full of learned and influential women.

Margaret was the daughter of Anthony Cooke, tutor to King Edward VI. Cooke saw to it that his daughters were so well educated and well matched that it is worth taking a moment to learn just how much so. Margaret’s eldest sister, Mildred, was the second wife of William Cecil, 1st Lord Burghley and father to Thomas Cecil (see chapter 3).4 Her sister Elizabeth was twice married, first to Sir Thomas Hoby and then to John, Lord Russell. Her sister Anne— noted translator of fourteen of Bernardino Ochino’s sermons (1550, 1570) and John Jewel’s Apologia Ecclesia Angli-canae (1564)5— was the second wife of William Bacon and mother of the renowned Anthony and Francis Bacon. Her sister Catherine married the diplomat Henry Killigrew. All four of Margaret’s sisters contributed to the Italian language manuscript of poetry, sermons, and philosophy on Giar-dino Cosmographico (1572); Mildred and Elizabeth wrote Greek epigrams, and Anne and Catherine composed Latin verses.6 Margaret simply may not have been able to participate in the composition. Her life, like her mar-riage, was shockingly short.

Death came to the occupants of Saundridge shortly after happiness had. The sisters’ married lives started happily enough. Elizabeth and Margaret were married on the same day, Elizabeth to Sir Thomas Hoby and Margaret to Sir Ralph Rowlet. Hoby recounts this day in his diary as “Monday June 27, 1558, [when] a marriage was made and solemnized between me and Elizabeth Cooke, daughter of sir Anthony Cooke, knight. The same day was also her sister Margaret the queen’s maid married to sir Ralph Rowlet, knight, who [Margaret] shortly after departed out of this lief.”7 Her death came in such short order that it was memorialized almost as part of the wed-ding. George Ballard claimed to have come across this sad little elegy:

On the nuptials of Ralph Rowlet and Thomas Hoby, who on the same day, espoused the two

4. Fuller, History of the Worthies of England, 1:543.5. For more on Anne Cooke Bacon and the Bacon sisters, see Demers, Women’s Writing in

English, 85.6. Ibid., 88.7. Hoby, Booke of the Travaile and Lief, ed. Powell, 126.


G G

225

Indexitalics indicate a figure or illustration

AAct of Parliament, 54, 89, 174Ainderby, 27, 28All Hallows (parish), 73Alnwick Castle, 33Amen Corner, London, xix, xxi– xxii, 1, 45,

73, 111Ames, Joseph, 8Anne (queen), xiv, 53, 95, 157– 58, 178,

181Apothecaries Guild, xi, 107, 124, 132,

132– 33, 139, 143Arpe, Elizabeth/Nan, xxii, 1, 11, 81– 85,

169– 70, 181, 186, 189– 90, 200– 201Ashmole, Elias, 7– 9, 13, 112, 164, 168,

170, 183– 85, 187, 194Ashton, Frances, xii, xiii, xxii– xxiii, 12,

127, 156– 57, 159– 60, 163, 184, 192– 94

Ashton, Jane, 5assault

Lady Jennings accused of, xxi, 146– 51, 195

witchcraft as. See under witchcraftastrology, 111– 12, 135Atkins, Mother, 36Axtell, James, xxi, 146, 195– 96

BBacon, Anthony, 18Bacon, Francis, 18, 53, 65Bacon, William, 18Baker, Dr., of Shrewsbury, 48

Baker familyAlexander, 92John, 137Mary (née Higgins). See Higgins, MaryRichard, 6Robert, 140– 43

Bancroft, Richard (archbishop), 55, 60Barony of Ross, 58, 61Bateman, Christopher, 8Bates, Dr. Thomas Blackbourne, xiii, xxii–

xxiii, 155– 56, 192Bath, 33, 76, 92, 135Belvoir Castle, 61– 65, 73, 182, 180Black- and- White Court, xix, xxii, 12, 108,

115– 17, 190Blagrave, Joseph, 65bleeding/bloodletting xxii, 1, 10– 11, 48–

49, 52– 53, 65, 107, 167Board, Elizabeth, 95Board, Sir Stephen, 95Bradborne, Anne, xiv, 11, 85, 190Bradwell, Stephen, 6, 75, 138Bridgeman, John, 91Bridges, Agnes, 44, 70Brigges, Robert, 44, 65Britton, Thomas, 8, 21Broadway, Giles, 95Bromley, Sir Edward, 63Bronnecker, Anne, 22, 24– 25Bronnecker, Joan, 21Brooker, Elizabeth, 8, 38– 39Brooker, John, 8Brown, Agnes, 79


G226 Index

Browne, Katharine, xiii, 11, 13, 85, 150, 152, 190, 192

Brownlow, Richard, 135Brydges family

Anne Stanley (Lady Audley), 95Catherine, 97Dorothy, 14, 180Frances, xi, 52, 59– 60, 64Grey (5th Baron Chandos), 52, 95Thomas, xi, 27– 29, 174, 180Ursula, 26, 147, 161, 169, 173, 195– 97,

200– 201William, 52

Bulbeck family, xviiiDorothy, 26– 30, 145– 50, 195– 97Thomas, 27– 29Ursula (née Grey), 169, 195– 97

Burbridge, Master, 36Burton, Robert, 23

CCalvert, George, 135Cambridge, 43, 91Cary, Sir Henry, 98Cecil family, xi, xvii

Elizabeth, 98Frances (née Brydges). See under Brydges

familyGeorgi- Ann, 6Robert (1st Earl of Salisbury), 26– 29Thomas (Lord Burghley, 1st Earl of

Essex), 88William, 6, 18

Cecil House, xx, 51, 138Chancery, 25, 174Chester, 40, 91, 92Church of England/Anglican Church, 17,

114Churchill, xi, 20, 22, 25– 26, 45, 98– 99,

102– 3, 105, 173Clara, Dina, 48Cleaver, Robert, 124Clerkenwell, xxii, 12, 33, 81– 82, 104, 108,

114, 117– 18, 128, 130, 165, 175, 193Clifford, Margaret (Russell), Countess of

Cumberland. See Russel, Margaret

Coke, Sir Edward, 21, 52– 58, 61, 64, 88, 93, 154, 165, 182

College of Physicians, 1, 42– 46, 55, 74– 75, 91, 105, 113, 124, 126– 27, 134, 138, 156, 160

counter-magic, 65, 69, 75– 77, 83– 84, 116, 151, 150, 170

Countesse; Countess, the, xiv, xxii, 1, 9– 11, 47, 78– 82, 97, 109, 116, 143– 44, 149– 51, 156, 160, 181, 188– 94

court (legal)Higgins case, 133– 37Jennings assault case, 145– 46Jennings family debt, 24– 28, 176property disputes, 20– 21, 58, 135– 37,

147– 48. See also debt and inheritance disputes

witchcraft cases, 59, 75, 120– 21, 158– 59, 169

Court of Star Chamber, 55– 56, 91, 90, 143

Culpeper, Nicholas, xiii, 133– 34, 139, 143, 183

curses/cursing, 2– 7, 20– 23, 26, 30, 34, 37, 39, 55, 62– 63, 69– 71, 74, 84, 121, 157, 161, 181, 184

DDarrell, John, 5, 71, 153Davis, Eleanor, 52, 95, 184debt and inheritance disputes

Bulbeck family inheritance, 29Cecil family inheritance, 58, 61Higgins dispute, 132– 33, 136Jennings family debt. See under court

(legal)Jennings inheribance, 22– 24, 176Latch family debt, 100– 101Mary Gargrave, requests for money, 158

Dee, John, 5– 6, 17, 32, 67, 111, 165devil, 3, 5, 22, 42– 43, 50, 54, 59, 65, 78,

79– 80, 84, 119, 120, 152, 161– 62Device, Alison, 37– 38Digby, Kenelm, 57, 64, 112, 165Donne, John

dirge on Latch memorial, 102memorial, 45


G227Index

Dromondby, Mistress/Mrs., xxii, 12, 108, 115– 17, 123, 128, 156, 159, 161, 190, 192

Duffield, Robert, 12, 160, 163, 193– 94

EEaster, xxii, 10, 44, 46, 77, 167, 174, 188,

198– 99Edmondes, Minister, 12, 162, 194Edward VI (king), 17– 18Elizabeth I (queen), 3, 32, 55, 88– 89, 113,

154Elmfield, 97– 98Emmes, Katherine, 81Enclosure Acts, 88– 91Evans, John, 112Exeter, Earl of/Countess of, xii, 10, 50– 53,

56, 58, 60, 64, 97, 104, 165, 189

FFairfax family

Edward, 76, 84, 110Elizabeth, 72– 77, 153Helen, 72– 77, 84– 85, 129Lady Dorothy, 76

Faulkner, Agnes, xiii, 11, 13, 85, 150, 152, 190, 192

Fenland drainage project, 86, 88, 98– 101, 105, 108

Fisher, Henry, xxi, 146, 195– 96Fitzpatrick, Lawrence, 95Fleet Street, 111, 115– 16Flower, Jane, Margaret, and Phillip, xiii,

xxii, 11, 61– 63, 69, 78, 80– 81, 84, 143, 152, 154, 189

Fowler, Jane, xiii, 13, 79– 81, 154, 160, 185, 193

Fowler, Thomas, xiii, xxiii, 6, 13, 80– 81, 150, 152– 55, 182, 185, 192

Foxe, Simeon, xii, xxi, 6, 10, 13, 32, 34– 35, 42– 47, 49, 65, 71, 73, 75– 77, 86, 103, 105, 107, 129, 131, 149, 152, 158, 164, 167, 182– 83, 185, 188

GGargrave, John, 157Gargrave, Mary, xiii, xxii, 6, 13, 47, 135,

144, 148, 150, 157– 59Gargrave, Robert, 158Gargrave, Thomas, 158Glover, Mary, 6, 43, 68, 72– 75, 85, 113,

129, 138Goodcole, Anne, xii, xiii, xxii– xxiii, 12– 13,

47, 108, 117– 24, 126– 28, 130– 31, 134, 146, 149– 50, 154, 156– 57, 159– 64, 181, 183– 84, 187, 192– 94

Goodcole, Henry, xiii, xxiii, 6– 7, 9, 12, 95, 108, 117– 22, 156, 159– 64, 184, 187, 192– 94

Great Fire of 1666, 43, 45, 123Gunpowder Alley, xix, xxii, 11, 57, 107– 8,

110– 16, 127, 184, 191Gunpowder Plot, 33, 165Gunter, Anne, 55, 60Gunter, Brian, 55

Hhanging (execution), 13, 83, 119–20, 141,

151–52, 184, 189, 191Harsnett, Samuel (bishop of York), 55, 60Harvey, William, 42– 43, 82, 91– 92Hatfield, Martha, 40Hathaway, Richard, 111Hayse, Alice, 82, 88Henry VIII, 3, 17, 96, 177Hertfordshire, 19, 21– 22, 25, 175Heywood, Thomas, 93, 124– 25Higgins family, xii, xviii

Arnold, xxi, 140– 41, 195– 96Mary (wife of Stephen), 145, 157, 184Mary (daughter of Stephen), 140–43Stephen, 131– 38, 180– 81

Holborn, 111, 114, 115Holland, Eleanor, 85Holywell, 20, 21, 155– 56, 176Hooper, Margaret, 41, 79House of Lords, 100Hughes, Samuel, 134– 35Hundreds of Winterstoke, 99, 202

Iillness, 10– 11, 166

epilepsy, 71– 73, 166– 69, 199


G228 Index

illness, continuedhysteria, 14, 48, 69, 74– 75, 166– 68,

185infant, 53mental, 16– 17, 22– 26, 34, 41, 53, 57–

58, 64, 69, 79, 87– 89, 180– 83, 185Inner Temple, 154Ireland, 42Isleworth, xxi, 10, 17, 30– 31, 33, 44, 104,

144Islington, xxii, 154

JJennings (Jenyns) family, xi, xv, 21

Dorothy (née Bulbeck). See Bulbeck, Dorothy.

John, 22– 25, 29– 31, 175– 78Thomas, xi, 21, 29, 30, 100

KKing’s Bench, 55– 56, 196Knaresboroughe, John, 146, 195– 96

LLake, Elizabeth, 53, 58– 61, 197Lamb, Dr. John, 57Lancashire, 5, 91, 124Lancaster (duchy), 27, 143Lancashire Seven, 5, 71, 91, 124Langford, 20, 86– 87, 98– 105Latch family, xv, 20, 103

Edmund, 98– 99John, 30– 31, 85, 86, 88, 98– 105, 169–

70, 195– 97, 202memorials to, 102– 5, 103, 104, 170,

173, 175Sarah, 102– 5

Lilly, Ruth, 8, 183Lilly, William, 8, 112, 134, 165, 177, 183Lloyd, Temperance, 186Long Acre, xx, 86– 88, 94– 98, 108, 150Lord Commissioners of the Treasury, 100Lords of the Privy Council, 57, 136– 37,

143, 155Lovelace, Richard, 112, 115Lusitanus, Amatus, 48

Mmagic

angel, 8image, 7, 63, 112, 163magical objects, 9, 34– 39, 55, 69– 70,

83– 84, 181maleficium, 3, 9, 34, 41, 65, 84, 120– 21Manners family, xv

Cecily, 62– 63Edward (Earl of Rutland), 58– 63Frances, 6, 52, 61Francis (6th Earl of Rutland), 52, 58,

61– 65, 70Henry, 63Katherine, 63– 65Lady Elizabeth, 58

Manor of the Savoy, 11, 27, 29, 45, 105, 142– 43, 169, 172– 74, 196

Manor Court, 143Marlowe, Christopher, 32medical treatments

amulets/talismans, 170bathing in oil, 10, 47, 167phlebotomy (blood-letting), 10– 11, 35,

47– 53, 65, 107pomancer (scent), 170, 200purging, 10, 37– 40rest, 76

melancholy, (medical diagnosis) 23, 44, 65, 71, 74, 166

Menghi, Girolamo, 114Middle Temple, 99Middlesex, 25, 27, 30– 31, 81, 99, 117,

137, 153, 173– 74, 190, 192, 202Monderford, Thomas, 6, 75Montague, Margaret (m. Slingsby). See

Slingsby, MargaretMontague, Simon, 95Moore, Francis, 135Morduck, Sarah, 111More, George, 5, 32Muschamp, Margaret, 41Myler, Anne, 5, 72

NNapier, Richard, xiii, xxiii, 6, 8– 9, 14, 23,

29, 47, 55, 57, 111, 113, 165– 71


G229Index

Nevill, Dorothy, 52Newgate Prison, xix, xxiii, 7, 12, 95, 108–

9, 117– 23, 119, 127, 150– 51, 156, 159, 162– 63, 184, 191– 94warden of, 132– 33, 141

Newport, William (Lord Hatton), 53North Somerset, 20, 25, 27– 28, 92, 99,

102, 173, 202Northamptonshire, 94– 95, 111Northumberland, 31, 33, 177– 78

OOld Bailey, xix, xxiii, 12, 115– 16, 119,

150, 155Order of the Garter , 7– 8Overbury, Thomas, 55, 154

PPacy, Deborah, 39Parliament, 89, 95, 101, 105, 175Paternoster Row, London, 1, 45, 55Paul’s Cross, 70, 104Percy, Henry (Earl of Northamptonshire),

17, 31– 33, 94, 153Percy, Katharine, 153Percy, Mary , 94petitions, 26, 28, 61, 86, 97, 100, 101

134, 137, 141physicians

female, xiii, 12, 108, 110, 117, 123– 28, 130, 160

male, 10, 42– 47Royal College of Physicians, 8, 42– 46,

55, 74– 75, 91, 105, 113, 124, 126– 27, 134, 156, 160

training for, 48, 125, 139Piccadilly, xx, 138– 43politics, 2, 8, 12, 24, 42, 53, 56– 57, 60,

83, 93, 97 133, 176possession, examples of, 5, 40– 45, 54– 60,

70– 77. See also Power, Williampossession, symptoms of, 39, 41, 74, 121

convulsions, 10, 40, 46, 67, 71– 75, 127, 151, 169, 188, 191, 199

melancholia, 23, 44, 65, 71, 74, 166obsession, 23, 36, 70 79

pain, 1, 5, 13, 39, 46, 72, 73, 83– 84, 131, 151

torment, 5, 13, 16, 37– 39, 46, 63, 70, 72– 75, 79– 85, 120, 144, 151, 156, 169– 70, 172, 186– 87

trances, 41, 44, 72, 85, 183vomiting, 39– 40

Power, William, 13, 150, 152– 53, 176prison, 2, 7, 11– 13, 33, 42, 60, 68– 69, 75,

82– 83, 89– 91, 108– 9, 117– 18, 121– 23, 144, 150– 51, 155– 58, 163, 169, 183, 189, 191, 193– 94

propertybuilding, xiii, 54– 55, 87– 108, 113–

18, 136– 37, 140– 43, 145, 150– 55, 181– 83

development, xiii, xx, 14, 77, 87– 128, 136– 37, 141– 43, 147, 149, 154, 166, 180– 82, 186

disputes, 13, 20– 21, 58, 147financing, 46, 51, 100– 101renovation, 14, 65, 87– 90, 94– 96, 143,

145, 180, 182rental, 20, 65, 89– 90, 99, 136– 38, 145

RRaleigh, Walter, 32, 154

Ratcliefe, Agnes, 119– 21, 156Roman Catholic Church, 4, 17, 55, 114–

15, 156Rowlet family, xv, xvii

Dorothy, 18, 44Elizabeth, 17Margaret (née Cooke), 18Ralph (Esquire), 17Sir Ralph, 17– 18 20, 176

Royal Society, 8Royalists, 101Russell family

Edward, 97Francis (Earl of Bedford), 97Margaret, 10– 11, 18, 87– 88, 107– 9,

143– 44, 149– 52, 163– 64, 184– 86. See also Countesse


G230 Index

SSamuel, Mother Alice, 79, 82, 184Satan, 6, 23, 79, 162Saundridge (estate), 1, 16– 22, 25, 30, 61,

144, 176, 178, 182, 186Savoy, 26– 27, 44, 104, 142– 43, 168, 170,

197– 98Sawyer, Mother, 85, 118, 120– 22, 156,

160, 163, 184Saxby, Mistress, xxii, 5, 11– 12, 108, 110–

11, 114– 15, 159, 169, 184Saxton, Faith, 11, 85, 190Scot, Reginald, 4, 71, 91, 162self- harm, 44Shipton, Agatha (Mother Shipton), 39, 71,

112, 177– 78Shoe Lane, 111– 12, 115Slingsby family, xviii

Elizabeth, 58, 86, 95Francis, 94Sir William, 86– 88, 96– 97, 155– 56,

190– 92Society of Barber- Surgeons, 138Somers, John, 7– 8Spicer, Richard, 127, 134St. Albans, 17, 20, 26, 175– 76Staunton, Mother, 36, 67Strand, the, xx, xxi, xxiii, 11, 26– 27, 29,

45, 51, 61, 65, 81, 94, 100– 101, 104, 107, 131, 137– 42, 147, 160, 169, 176, 193, 196– 97, 201

Stubbs, Katharine, xxii, 11, 69, 78, 80, 143, 189

Syon House, 31– 33, 32, 67, 94, 104, 153

TThrockmorton, Elizabeth, 41, 72, 79, 82,

85Throckmorton, Grace, 72, 79, 82, 85Throckmorton, Jane, 46, 72, 79, 82, 85Throckmorton, Mary, 72, 79, 82, 85Throckmorton, Robert, 79, 82, 85Tower, the, 33, 57Trapnel, Anna, 40, 111Turner, Anne, 55, 141, 154Turner, George, 55Turner, William, 27

VVernatti, Philiberto, 100, 150Villiers, George (Duke of Buckingham),

56, 58, 61, 64– 65Villiers, Sir John, 56– 58, 64, 95, 165Villiers family, xviii

WWaite, Margaret (sr. and jr.), 76, 80Wells (jailer, Newgate), 150, 194West Country, the, 82– 83, 175, 183, 189Westminster Court of Burgesses, 136Wight, Sarah, 40, 111, 161wills, 20, 173Wimbledon, 53, 59, 60witchcraft

assault by, 109confessions of, 59– 60, 63, 67, 70, 84,

91, 118– 19, 121– 22, 144, 155– 56, 160, 163, 190– 94

counter-magic. See counter-magicimprisonment for, 12, 59– 60, 75, 109–

10, 144, 149– 51physical examinations of accused, 91– 92witnesses to, 36, 69, 161

Witchcraft Act of 1604, 3, 54, 83Wood, Nan (Agnes), xxii, 11, 69, 78– 81,

88, 143, 189

YYork, 37, 65, 76– 77, 116, 177, 182York Assize, 77


G G

231

About the Author

Kirsten C. Uszkalo is specialist in seventeenth- century literature, early modern cultural studies, and women’s writing, and is the author of numer-ous scholarly articles on witchcraft, possession, and digital culture. She is the lead of the Witches in Early Modern England Project and the found-ing editor of the journal Preternature: Critical and Historical Studies in the Preternatural (Penn State Press). Her first book, Bewitched and Bedevilled (Palgrave Macmillan, 2015), uses cognitive science and neuroscience to understand possession phenomenon in early modern England. She is cur-rently teaching digital humanities at Athabasca University.


Habent sua fata libelli - Truman State University Press · Dorothy Jennings: mother of Elizabeth...

Documents

Transcript of Habent sua fata libelli - Truman State University Press · Dorothy Jennings: mother of Elizabeth...