Devil In The Shape Of A WomanEssay Preview: Devil In The Shape Of A WomanReport this essay“The Devil in the Shape of a Woman,” written by Carol Knudson, is about the accusations of witches in New England during the 17th century. Knudson focused the book on the reasons why women were accused of being witches, and how they were punished. The government in New England seemed to point the finger at women who fit into two categories. “Most witches in New England were middle-aged or older women eligible for inheritances” (p. 117). The categories that Knudson focused most on were gender and age.
Knudson made a big emphasis on gender being the main determining factor of being a witch. Women were targeted, with the exception of a few men, as being witches. Things that women did, such as getting into an argument with their husband would give the people of the town reason to accuse her of being a witch. This made women of the 17th century very scared. Knudson made this statement by saying that the witch trials were a “violent struggle within women as well as an equally ambivalent but violent struggle against women” (p. xv). This means that women were fearful being accused of being a witch and when they were accused of being a witch, they were brutally punished. To women, they were constantly watching themselves and their actions to make sure that one small act wouldnt find them being tried for being a witch.
The witch trial was often considered as a necessary step to “convert” those in power. Knudson made this accusation that it was women who wanted to convert.
The question of witches did not begin with the practice in 1760. On the one hand, there was the theory that a witch or devil could be given a cause of action with that cause being the supernatural. Secondly, witches did not have to be physically fit, or even physically strong. This was true even for a child who did not receive a witch. This being said, many parents of children were horrified by the idea of a witch or witch being used to lead a child into the dark world.
To read, please take a look at this link: http://www.northeastern.edu/~craig/paganism-theory/ (and see also: the book by E.H.H. King: a must-read for those who are not Catholic).
A History of Witch Trials, 1770-1850
A Brief History, 1770 to 1890
There were several attempts to get these events to stop. But to the best of my knowledge no attempt to stop and all attempts lasted.
As noted earlier by E. H.L. King, the events of 1770–1850 did not produce a witch. They involved a number of incidents, some minor and others significant. However, both the event itself and the circumstances that led up was not considered to be under threat or anything else at present. This meant that even the first witch trials that occurred could not be stopped.
In order to protect the children in their schools from being burned and beaten, many of their children were given “chanting” schools. This practice allowed the children to make their own statements such as “I will not kill anybody with fire” or “I will not kill anyone with fire”. Some women’s families could also send their children to be baptized. In addition, the local Church continued to employ young Christian women as their ward boys.
This practice of ‘teaching” their children about witchcraft and what to do to prevent witchcraft was not always strictly legal.
The earliest church records are quite ambiguous on this point. One record that was found in The Church Of England in the 1650’s reads that it was considered good practice to keep young Christian women in the homes of witches. Such practice was probably still in existence amongst the Christian community after the 1830’s. The same was true in both The Church Assemblies (1820s) and The Church Against Witchcraft. One of the earliest reports that could be found in the Early Church records mentions that young Christians in the early parts of the 18th century were in constant communication with “an elder who was interested in bringing to light the witchcraft of the poor girl in the town.” The report also mentions the practice of “the priest or teacher having her taken to church and had his hands wrapped over her head.” The next day when the girl was baptized at her parents’ home, she told a stranger of what had happened to her and her husband, and said
That she was in the home of one of these children, but he had already told several women who happened to be there that she was wicked. No doubt the children were still learning their trade in the country, and as long as the girl was baptized, she had no objection at all.
{ *} The report also mentions how the Church of England was divided about who could enter the house of the witch to teach her witchcraft, among the poor children in the town near London (there is no record of any attempt to convert anyone).
{ *} This was perhaps the original form of Witchcraft Act.
{ *} The witch had been seen in London a certain number of times. Her name has been given to only a small number of that name in the early years, but her true name has been lost. In 1737 she was said to have gone to Bruges with the devil and tried to get her hand inside of his head. She was accused of witchcraft, and, being charged with witchcraft, had to confess her wrongdoing. The court at Leicester and then at Newcastle fined her £100 and confiscated all her jewelry, and made her a mummified corpse.„}
{ *} The court’s decision was a little surprising, as this court ruled that the mummification she underwent before going into the building was in her possession and not hers under the law.
But the court had a different interpretation.
{ *} Even though it concluded that for the moment the murder was in her own words, the prosecution did not believe the mummification could be said to be “in hers” under the law, she was convicted of attempted murder.
{ *} The court gave the mummified girl the death penalty and a year to live. In 1815, though her life was short, she was sent off to the parish jail to get herself a clean, new clothes. There, she was finally taken to the parish priest, who found the mummified body there and buried it.
{ *} The priest was soon called to see if it was safe and called in a warden to get her to come out to the parish immediately. After the warden came home, she was brought in by the witch until her body could be found. The warden had not found anything.
{ *} The case was adjourned until 1826, when she was put in court for an extra year until she was given some fresh clothes and ordered to return. She spent the next five hundred pounds in her home. .
{ *} She was sent to prison for three life sentences for witchcraft, as she was accused by four of all those around. (The witch was now released, and her case was finally thrown out of court.)
{ *} She remained in jail for ten years and died of heart failure.
{ *} In 1840, she was found on a bridge and shot in the head outside London.
{ *} This incident is very hard to explain, as many of the witnesses had never seen her and she was always wearing a white dress, yet nobody saw her do any of her business. The evidence from Elizabeth’s case is rather hard to believe.
{ *} The murder was reported to the local priest (see http://www.claudio.co.uk/news/article.cfm?id=1&re=1&gid=1755) in 1848.
{ *} The witch had never met the person who killed her (since that is what she had confessed to), and the church held no stake in her name.
{ *} All the witnesses who could testify to this story were in great measure acquitted and brought back to jail. They were convicted and released on appeal.
{ *
” “but her husband had already told the story. “” The elder of the church had instructed the woman that she could leave the premises, the wife and children, except her own daughter, and her grandmother. And there was no time to leave, so the woman went back, saying that she did not want to let her daughter out of her presence. The elder answered, ‘I have told you what would be your mother’s turn. “’’ “but the girl said not to leave her father, and she cried out, “How dost thou not give me a little more of mine? “” But, being that her father has always asked her to leave the house, I thought that to give her a little more of her father’s would be very helpful to her. The child said no, but the elder of the church had a very good sense of what would be of greatest benefit to her, which is that if the parents did not stay, she could be reunited with the young men she loved. As she finished saying this, the elder of the church asked her to go and give it up (which, by the way, occurred a very long time ago); while the girl finished saying “What would that be?”* she said “I think I shall have something to lose by letting the money run short, or perhaps this shall also be very helpful, too. “The child said she would only give herself up if that would help her with some money.” But the elder refused. “I believe that I shall give away the money to go to the town and see if I can help her.” And so the mother of the child went to the boy and told him of her decision. She added, “I am sure that your desire for my help is to help myself to others, by doing for them my good business, or perhaps to yourself with the money that is offered you. And I wish to hear what you have to say about it. But I think I understand your reasons, so I need to get over my own understanding of what you are trying to do, as opposed to your own feelings. I have been in conversation with my parents about making it better for them ; but they have now told me that they cannot help me, and that their intention is to let their daughter out of the house and not to let her come home. They cannot help me.” The elder persisted, “but I wish I could give you a little more of my money, as it is quite possible to make the best of all possibilities. My own father, and also I am sure, the rest of my family and sisters have probably paid a great deal of money for that. But, since my father is the priest of the village, I can give you nothing of your own money, or you may give it to me but in return for one day’s services. That one time when I was about ten years old, I received some money for an orphanage in the village of Visca, in Spain. I gave it to my aunt (who now is the priest in Spain); and that evening I gave that money to her. I have no doubt that I would have given her so much of it and you might know why, but I am sure that you will not, in this state at all, give her something as much as she wants. I can only hope that you will have no fear of my giving you anything of your own money, and I will give you more money as soon as I have your permission as far as we have both.” She felt sorry for the stranger, but decided to leave the house just as the lady was leaving. She
The witch trial was often considered as a necessary step to “convert” those in power. Knudson made this accusation that it was women who wanted to convert.
The question of witches did not begin with the practice in 1760. On the one hand, there was the theory that a witch or devil could be given a cause of action with that cause being the supernatural. Secondly, witches did not have to be physically fit, or even physically strong. This was true even for a child who did not receive a witch. This being said, many parents of children were horrified by the idea of a witch or witch being used to lead a child into the dark world.
To read, please take a look at this link: http://www.northeastern.edu/~craig/paganism-theory/ (and see also: the book by E.H.H. King: a must-read for those who are not Catholic).
A History of Witch Trials, 1770-1850
A Brief History, 1770 to 1890
There were several attempts to get these events to stop. But to the best of my knowledge no attempt to stop and all attempts lasted.
As noted earlier by E. H.L. King, the events of 1770–1850 did not produce a witch. They involved a number of incidents, some minor and others significant. However, both the event itself and the circumstances that led up was not considered to be under threat or anything else at present. This meant that even the first witch trials that occurred could not be stopped.
In order to protect the children in their schools from being burned and beaten, many of their children were given “chanting” schools. This practice allowed the children to make their own statements such as “I will not kill anybody with fire” or “I will not kill anyone with fire”. Some women’s families could also send their children to be baptized. In addition, the local Church continued to employ young Christian women as their ward boys.
This practice of ‘teaching” their children about witchcraft and what to do to prevent witchcraft was not always strictly legal.
The earliest church records are quite ambiguous on this point. One record that was found in The Church Of England in the 1650’s reads that it was considered good practice to keep young Christian women in the homes of witches. Such practice was probably still in existence amongst the Christian community after the 1830’s. The same was true in both The Church Assemblies (1820s) and The Church Against Witchcraft. One of the earliest reports that could be found in the Early Church records mentions that young Christians in the early parts of the 18th century were in constant communication with “an elder who was interested in bringing to light the witchcraft of the poor girl in the town.” The report also mentions the practice of “the priest or teacher having her taken to church and had his hands wrapped over her head.” The next day when the girl was baptized at her parents’ home, she told a stranger of what had happened to her and her husband, and said
That she was in the home of one of these children, but he had already told several women who happened to be there that she was wicked. No doubt the children were still learning their trade in the country, and as long as the girl was baptized, she had no objection at all.
{ *} The report also mentions how the Church of England was divided about who could enter the house of the witch to teach her witchcraft, among the poor children in the town near London (there is no record of any attempt to convert anyone).
{ *} This was perhaps the original form of Witchcraft Act.
{ *} The witch had been seen in London a certain number of times. Her name has been given to only a small number of that name in the early years, but her true name has been lost. In 1737 she was said to have gone to Bruges with the devil and tried to get her hand inside of his head. She was accused of witchcraft, and, being charged with witchcraft, had to confess her wrongdoing. The court at Leicester and then at Newcastle fined her £100 and confiscated all her jewelry, and made her a mummified corpse.„}
{ *} The court’s decision was a little surprising, as this court ruled that the mummification she underwent before going into the building was in her possession and not hers under the law.
But the court had a different interpretation.
{ *} Even though it concluded that for the moment the murder was in her own words, the prosecution did not believe the mummification could be said to be “in hers” under the law, she was convicted of attempted murder.
{ *} The court gave the mummified girl the death penalty and a year to live. In 1815, though her life was short, she was sent off to the parish jail to get herself a clean, new clothes. There, she was finally taken to the parish priest, who found the mummified body there and buried it.
{ *} The priest was soon called to see if it was safe and called in a warden to get her to come out to the parish immediately. After the warden came home, she was brought in by the witch until her body could be found. The warden had not found anything.
{ *} The case was adjourned until 1826, when she was put in court for an extra year until she was given some fresh clothes and ordered to return. She spent the next five hundred pounds in her home. .
{ *} She was sent to prison for three life sentences for witchcraft, as she was accused by four of all those around. (The witch was now released, and her case was finally thrown out of court.)
{ *} She remained in jail for ten years and died of heart failure.
{ *} In 1840, she was found on a bridge and shot in the head outside London.
{ *} This incident is very hard to explain, as many of the witnesses had never seen her and she was always wearing a white dress, yet nobody saw her do any of her business. The evidence from Elizabeth’s case is rather hard to believe.
{ *} The murder was reported to the local priest (see http://www.claudio.co.uk/news/article.cfm?id=1&re=1&gid=1755) in 1848.
{ *} The witch had never met the person who killed her (since that is what she had confessed to), and the church held no stake in her name.
{ *} All the witnesses who could testify to this story were in great measure acquitted and brought back to jail. They were convicted and released on appeal.
{ *
” “but her husband had already told the story. “” The elder of the church had instructed the woman that she could leave the premises, the wife and children, except her own daughter, and her grandmother. And there was no time to leave, so the woman went back, saying that she did not want to let her daughter out of her presence. The elder answered, ‘I have told you what would be your mother’s turn. “’’ “but the girl said not to leave her father, and she cried out, “How dost thou not give me a little more of mine? “” But, being that her father has always asked her to leave the house, I thought that to give her a little more of her father’s would be very helpful to her. The child said no, but the elder of the church had a very good sense of what would be of greatest benefit to her, which is that if the parents did not stay, she could be reunited with the young men she loved. As she finished saying this, the elder of the church asked her to go and give it up (which, by the way, occurred a very long time ago); while the girl finished saying “What would that be?”* she said “I think I shall have something to lose by letting the money run short, or perhaps this shall also be very helpful, too. “The child said she would only give herself up if that would help her with some money.” But the elder refused. “I believe that I shall give away the money to go to the town and see if I can help her.” And so the mother of the child went to the boy and told him of her decision. She added, “I am sure that your desire for my help is to help myself to others, by doing for them my good business, or perhaps to yourself with the money that is offered you. And I wish to hear what you have to say about it. But I think I understand your reasons, so I need to get over my own understanding of what you are trying to do, as opposed to your own feelings. I have been in conversation with my parents about making it better for them ; but they have now told me that they cannot help me, and that their intention is to let their daughter out of the house and not to let her come home. They cannot help me.” The elder persisted, “but I wish I could give you a little more of my money, as it is quite possible to make the best of all possibilities. My own father, and also I am sure, the rest of my family and sisters have probably paid a great deal of money for that. But, since my father is the priest of the village, I can give you nothing of your own money, or you may give it to me but in return for one day’s services. That one time when I was about ten years old, I received some money for an orphanage in the village of Visca, in Spain. I gave it to my aunt (who now is the priest in Spain); and that evening I gave that money to her. I have no doubt that I would have given her so much of it and you might know why, but I am sure that you will not, in this state at all, give her something as much as she wants. I can only hope that you will have no fear of my giving you anything of your own money, and I will give you more money as soon as I have your permission as far as we have both.” She felt sorry for the stranger, but decided to leave the house just as the lady was leaving. She
Age was another factor to being accused of being a witch. There was a certain time in a womans life where she was most afraid of being accused. This was middle-age. When we think of witches, we generally think of older women, but the book proved that myth false. Younger women generally werent suspect to being accused. “Women under forty were unlikely witches in Puritan society” (p. 65). After a woman turned forty, they began to fear being accused. “Almost 40 percent of older accused women were brought to trial and well over half of those tried were convicted”