Historical Homosexuality (and why pride is so important)

 Trigger Warning. Sexual persecution, criminal injustice, sexual activity in a youth (but not a minor).

This was a difficult one to write, more so to research. I had hoped to have it for June and Pride month, but unfortunately, I wasn't able to get it finished in time. As some of you will know, I am an avid supporter of pride and equal rights for all sexualities. Whilst my research expertise is not in the history of gay rights, I do explore historical sexuality in some of my novels, and try to ensure that such individuals are sympathetically and genuinely portrayed. Now, as some of you know, my PhD expertise is is late 18th and early 19th century history. Whilst I focus mainly on asylums, I do also research this period in general. I did consider writing up a history here of homosexuality and the law but to do so would have stepped outside of my own expertise and so I have decided instead to discuss the topic within my own area. I also have been exploring this topic in relation to two separate novels I have written, to try to maintain historical accuracy with a sympathetic eye to those who were the victims of their times and a lack of understanding which existed therein.

Ok, so first and foremost it is important to realise that between the dates we are talking homosexuality - referred to often in contemporary documents as sodomy or as buggery - was illegal in some parts of the uk right up until the late seventies / early eighties. And by that, i mean the NINETEEN seventies and Eighties. Yes, it really was that recent. Homosexuality was punishable by death in England up until the 1860s and after that could still incur life imprisonment and worse in the twentieth centuries such as chemical castration.

One particularly useful source for historians of law and crime is that of the Old Bailey Proceedings. The Old Bailey proceedings were published as a commercial venture, (for money, to be sold to the public) but are considered less sensationalist than other more extreme eighteenth century crime books such as "The Newgate Calendar". They were basically, accounts of the trials which were held at the Old Bailey criminal courts in London. Their validity as a source has been discussed by historian John Langbein who states that whilst they were produced for commercial purposes, they suffer very little “invented nor significantly distorted” content. It is also discussed on the Old Bailey website, that these proceedings did have a better adherence to the truth of the matter, due to them needing the lord mayors signature before they could be printed.

On the old bailey website there are 166 entries for trials of "sodomy" between 1750 and 1850. This does not include anybody who was tried for "sodomitical intent" as due to how the people reported these incidents in the day, those are mixed in with sexual assaults and so it is difficult to gauge which were sexual assaults and which were examples of consensual homosexual relationships. Of the 166 people who were tried for sodomy, 90 of them were found to be guilty. The Old Bailey's own blog explains that it was actually difficult to prove sodomy as there had to be eyewitness evidence to both penetration and ejaculation to prove a case. None the less, half of the cases which went to trial at the Old Bailey were found to be guilty and of these men, over half received the full sentence of death by hanging. This then, already goes to show that the idea of people being put to death in England for nothing other than being gay is no old wives tale or rumour - it is an actual recorded truth. This is based on a very small case study, with easily accessible data and already we are looking at over 50 people who died for their sexual orientation - what I am trying to say is, this is the tip of the iceberg!

Just to note - it is harder to trace lesbianism in this way, as sexual behaviour between two women was not a capital offence - in cases of the law, it came down to penetration as a deciding factor between what was considered sex or not.

I think, out of all the cases which I read whilst I was researching for this piece, the one which touched my heart the most was that of a young man named Thomas White.

Thomas White was a sixteen year old boy who was hanged for sodomy in 1811. He was tried and convicted alongside his lover who was a man some years older than he was. The Old Bailey records state only that the pair had indulged in "unnatural behaviour" and that it was too shocking to print, however the newspapers of the time give more of an idea of what happened. One entry was found in Sun, 6th December 1810. Now whilst possibly a precursor to "the Sun" a tabloid paper, it is worth noting that the concept of tabloid papers did not really exist before 1900 and so all newspapers can be viewed to hold similar levels of sensationalism. However, this still gives us some insight into what happened.

On the night before the event happened, The lover, a Mr Hepburn, involved a companion to request a meeting with Thomas White, who was then sixteen. Hepburn was a soldier about to be deployed, and White was a drummer boy. White was approached by the mutual friend, and this proposition was put to him, by which he agreed although he suggested they not go to Mr Hepburn's apartments as suggested for a cordial dinner, but to go perhaps somewhere more private. They then proceeded to spend the night together. This would have remained a secret tryst, but for the accomplice in bringing the two together who, when realising the activity he had facilitated, went and alerted the law as to what had happened. Thomas was arrested straight away, he still being in London, and officers were sent to accost Hepburn and to bring him home. Both men were tried together at the Old Bailey. Both were found guilty and sentenced to be hanged. A brief respite was granted for reasons unknown, however this was revoked and both men were hanged three months later at Newgate Prison.

Newgate Prison

This is a similar story to many of the cases recorded by the Old Bailey. These are voices still not heard, a loss of lives which is negated and made hollow every time somebody says "Well, what about straight pride". Whilst there has of course been some progress since then, with homosexuality no longer illegal in the UK, elsewhere in the world, there are still executions every day of people for their sexuality. At a time when we celebrate pride, and the notion that love is love, it is also important to look backwards and remember those who lost their lives for that notion.

Thanks you for reading

Sources

https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/forms/formMain.jsp

British Newspaper Archive - Sun, 6th December 1810

Pan - a Greek Legend

This piece is an article I wrote for the 2019/2020 "Wonky Broomstick Diary".  

 As you are walking out in the lushest part of the greenest forest you can imagine, a figure catches your eye. He’s like nothing you’ve ever seen before, cloven hooved, ancient eyes and ears which poke up out of his hair like an animal. He has horns like a goat and eludes a feeling of ancient wisdom, interspersed with playfulness and raw animalistic power. In his hand, he carries a musical instrument: a set of pipes made of reeds, and all about you, you can hear the sound of the leaves swishing so that they sound like the laughter of young women. You might well have just stumbled into the realm of the god Pan!

Pan is a well-known figure in modern paganism, known for his half-goat form and iconic “Pan pipes”.

 

This article will give you a run-down of where he originated, and how he had risen to become such a well-known deity.

Pan was first mentioned in ancient Greek mythology. He was first worshipped in the region of Arcadia as far back as the 4^th century BCE where he was heralded as the god of mountain and pasture. From there his image spread throughout Greece but whereas most of the Greek gods were worshiped at temples or shrines, Pan was rarely approached in this way, and was more often worshiped out in nature. Pan was thought also to be a close acquaintance (drinking buddy!) of Dionysus, the Greek god of festivity and wine, and there are several stories in the mythology about their antics! In Roman mythology, there is another remarkably similar god named Faunus and in modern understanding of Pan, some of Faunus’s traits have been incorporated, and some believe that he might well have been a cultural representation of the same god. Faunus, like Pan, was an animalistic god, being also half-goat and half man. In Roman terms, this amalgamation is a faun, named for Faunus, and in Greek terms it is a satyr. Both terms are nowadays used interchangeably. Both Faunus and Pan share the traits of being the god of pasture, mountain and fields, as well as having something of a reputation as erotic and sometimes lustful gods! There is ongoing debate still, as to whether Pan and Faunus are the same god, brother gods, or unrelated, however the stories told of them are remarkably similar!

Pan is, in general, seen as a happy-go-lucky sort of a chap! He was especially fond of Nymphs and is often referred to in conjunction with these creatures, quite literally! He is often portrayed as erotic, and many of the stories about him include some level of romance or sex – usually with nymphs although that is not unusual for a forest god, one would imagine! He drinks, sings, dances and frolics about the forests.

Despite his jolly and frivolous nature, some of the stories of Pan show his downfalls too, as he is often described as too hedonistic and unthinking in his pursuit of pleasure!  One of the most famous stories of Pan is that of how he forged his pan-pipes:

 Deep in the forests at the foot of a row of ancient mountains, there lived a wood nymph named Syrinx. Syrinx was the most beautiful of wood nymphs, with rich long hair and eyes which flashed with playful intrigue. She lived happily and was sister to the river nymphs of a nearby body of water. Pan, who walks all mountain paths and pastures, happened into

Pan and Syrinx by Edmund Dulak

Syrinx’s forest. The day was bright and lush, with the sunshine creating reflections on the water, and the scent of wildflowers in the air. Pan’s footsteps took him from the path, and towards a rushing waterfall nearby. There, he caught sight of Syrinx for the very first time, washing her thick and luscious hair in the waterfall. At once was taken by her beauty and her playful manner. She smiled, and he was lost – madly in love with her in the blink of an eye! Pan moved in closer as she sat out on the rocks, naked as nymphs are, and made a motion to speak with her, to entice her to come to him as so many of her kind had before. Syrinx, however, knowing of his reputation and unwilling to be the next in line of his conquests, jumped up at once and fled into the woods. Pan, thinking this was some game – for nymphs were known to play such – took off after her, laughing and enjoying the fun of the chase. Realising that Pan pursued her, Syrinx ran to her sisters, the river nymphs, and asked them to hide her from Pan, so that he would pass on and be about his business. The river nymphs did so, turning her into a reed on the edge of the river. Seeing this, Pan fell to his knees and begged the river nymphs to turn her back so that he might speak with her, but they – being scatty as nymphs often are – did not know the magics to undo the spells and so were unable to turn Syrinx back. As the days passed, the reeds that had been Syrinx melded in with the others which grew upon the banks of the river, wilting and rising again so that she became lost there. Pan mourned for long days at the side of the river, but as he sobbed, his breath cast over the reeds, sending out a song so mournful and beautiful that even the river nymphs themselves wept to hear it. Pan, in desperation that Syrinx not be lost, as well as in remorse for his unwitting participation in her downfall, cut seven reeds from the riverbank, and there he bound them together to become what is known as the Syrinx Pipes, or as they are more commonly known, Panpipes.

There are some slight variations to this tale, in some cases it is Zeus himself who turned Syrinx into a reed, and refused to turn her back in his annoyance at the nymphs and their games – something of a cautionary tale for young girls! In others Pan was said to have raped the nymph, or have tried to.

Despite this and other such pieces of folklore about him, somewhat unusually for Greek mythology, Pan doesn’t really seem to have a role in the god-politics of the time. Other than being the guardian of pastures and fields, he didn’t really have a role, spent no time involved in the usual antics which went on around Mount Olympus and did not engage with the power struggles with which Greek mythology is littered. Due to this, there are some scholars who believe that Pan actually predates Greek mythology and was incorporated into their stories as an outside agent. This debate has led to various theories about Pan’s origins, with some scholars claiming that he could be one of the oldest gods in existence, or even the original horned god, and that the Greek version of Pan is just another interpretation of him. I even read one article where Pan was cited to be possibly another aspect of the green man!

Whatever his origins, Pan has become a household name in witchy and pagan circles. Nowadays, rather than the god of pastures and fields, Pan is considered the shepherd between civilised life and the wilds, and in some cases, the guardian of the gate to faerie or other worlds. Pan is used most often used to represent sexual frenzy – not fertility or love, but raw lust and passion. He represents the inner self, the animalistic and primal self which follows hedonism and indulgence. He is said to control primal urges and one article even named him as the inventor of masturbation! In modern-day worship, Pan is still mostly worshipped out of doors, and can be called upon to strike passion and lust into your magics, rituals and circles. He can guide the mind away from the normality of civilised life, and allow you to step back to a more wild and unfettered state. Be wary though, as he is often set on his own pleasures, and has a reputation for carelessness with other beings!

 

Nursery Rhyme Origins - Banbury Cross

 Ride a cock horse to Banbury Cross

To see a fine lady upon a white horse

With rings on her fingers and bells on her toes

She shall have music wherever she goes.

This rhyme is perhaps not so well known as others, but is often present in nursery rhyme books,
especially older ones. I certainly remember it from my youth, and have during the research for this blog come upon it several times.

Firstly, it should be noted that there are several variants to the rhyme, the most notable of which is the change to a fine lady, from an old woman, during the 1700s. The rhyme, as printed in “Tom Tits Songbook”, (published in 1790 by C. D. Piguenit of Aldgate, London), actually goes thus:

Ride a cock horse to Banbury Cross

To see an old lady, upon a white horse

A ring on her finger,

A bonnet of straw,

The strangest old lady that you ever saw

As well as this, there are some variations which give Coventry Cross as the lady’s location, amongst other places. The question to be begged then, is can we deduce the identity of the “fine lady” or indeed, “Old lady” from the clues in the rhyme?

The first thing is to deduce the approx. age of the rhyme. So far, we know it is at least older than 1790, which disproves one theory found online, that the fine lady was in fact a Lady Katherine Banbury, from the late 1800s, despite how that lady bore the name Banbury and was well-known for riding a white horse with bells attached to her saddle. One place where it might be alluded to, is in a poem written in 1725 by Henry Carey which states “now on a cock horse he does ride”. This then,  could potentially be the earliest mention of the rhyme. This could also, however, be alluding to one of several other rhymes which both start with the same line, “Ride a cock-horse” although of course it is more than possible that at one time these were all verses of the same rhyme or song. For example, in the 1744’s Tommy Thumb’s pretty songbook, the following lines were recorded:

Ride a cock-horse To Banbury Cross,

To see what Tommy can buy;

A penny white loaf,A penny white cake,

And a two-penny aple-pie.

Or, as seen in another pic here from Tommy Thumb's Book of Pretty songs, another very similar rhyme:

These verses, it could be argued seem to have the same rhythm and style of the fine lady variant and so add credulity to the idea that this rhyme was originally set into several different verses.

Whilst it might seem that the use of currency in the “Tommy” part of the rhyme is a good start to try to date it, it is most likely that the currency would change over the years, as the rhyme evolved, so this is in fact not an accurate measure at all. What might be more relevant, and has been cited by a number of other scholars, is the allusion to clothing in the “fine lady” verse. During the 25^th century, it was, in England at least, fashionable to wear tapered shoes which often were decorated with tiny bells (the tradition of bells on shoes or around ankles or lower legs for Morris dancers also potentially comes from this era!) Couple this, then, with the history of Banbury Cross, which was destroyed in 1602 by puritans, and it would seem that there is strong evidence to show this fine, or old, lady was likely of the 15^th century. What must be noted however, is that there were other crosses in Banbury at the time, so although unlikely, it is possible that the rhyme refers to another cross.

So, the next step in this mystery is to look into what notable and fine ladies might have been likely candidates for such a rhyme. Firstly to note is that although in general a cock-horse might have been a spirited horse, or a horse which was brought in to assist in pulling carts where the terrain was difficult, during the 16^th century at least a cock-horse could also allude to a child’s toy horse, something like a hobby horse. This then, especially if the rhyme is actually a children’s rhyme, brings the imagery of the children lining up to look out at the lady, a procession perhaps for royalty, or personages of note.
In his 1962 book, the “Annotated mother goose” history scholar, William Baring-Gould  comments that there are three distinct possibilities as to the identity of this mystery woman. That it was Elizabeth I, that it was a medieval noblewoman named Lady Godiva, or that it was a different noblewoman named Celia Fiennes.
Let us examine each of these ladies individually!
Elizabeth I is certainly a good contender for the part. Certainly, Banbury cross was present during her reign, which is eveidenced both by knowledge of when the stone fell, and also by the comments of a Mathew Knight in 1604 who stated:“remembraunce all the publique proclamacions of our late soueraigne Ladie Quene Elizabeth and of her (most) noble progenitors that were directed thither to be proclaymed were alwaies made and proclaymed vpon the step~ or grises of the same heigh Crosse” (That is, that all royal proclamations given by the then Late Elizabeth, were read out by the Babury representative at Banbury Cross.)

 The white horse, in this case, could symbolise not just royalty, but also the white for the “virgin queen”. However, it can also be seen that despite there being many uncited references to Elizabeth I visiting Banbury for the erection of the Banbury cross, thus far I have found no sources to cite this, in fact in his 1841 book on the history of Banbury, A Beesley made no mention of Elizabeth ever having visited. Another fact to consider is that Elizabeth might have been a little late (about 100 years) to be wearing the shoes with bells on, although as an extravagant dresser, it’s still possible she wore such accessories.

The second lady who this rhyme is cited to be about is Lady Godiva, a noblewoman from 1067 who is said to have ridden naked through the streets as a protest against high taxes. Whilst Lady Godiva was a real historical figure, her deeds are the stuff of legends, namely legends created in the 13^th century! Other than the obvious connection of a “fine lady on a white horse” there is little but speculation to link this rhyme to Lady Godiva.
The third and final lady to consider is that of Celia Fiennes. All that is really known of Celia is that she was a noblewoman who was well-known for being a keen rider. The story here, is that the original verse was “A Fiennes Lady” rather than a "Fine" Lady. Celia was also sister to the viscount of Banbury castle, so there is a connection there. She was, however about 100 years late to be visiting Banbury cross, having been born in the late 1600, so 100 years after the cross was destroyed! An anecdote mentioned in the Oxford dictionary of nursery rhymes states that this version of events was actually made up by the antiquarian who claimed to discover it!
Overall then, it would seem that the fine lady on the white horse was most likely to be Queen Elizabeth I. Despite some discrepancies, she seems to fit the most comfortably into the clues given by the rhyme!

Sources used:

Baring-Gould, William Stuart, and Ceil Baring-Gould, The Annotated Mother Goose, Nursery Rhymes Old And New, Arr. And Explained By William S. Baring-Gould & Ceil Baring-Gould, 1st edn (New York: C.N. Potter, 1962)Beesley, Alfred, The History Of Banbury, 1st edn (London: Nichols and Son, 1841)

Candicott, Randolf, "Ride A Cock-Horse To Banbury Cross & A Farmer Went Trotting Upon His Grey Mare : R. Caldecott's Picture Books", Project Gutenberg, 2017 <http://www.gutenberg.org/files/18596/18596-h/18596-h.htm> [accessed 4 April 2017]

Gurton, Gammer, "Gammer Gurton's Garland, Or, The Nursery Parnassus : A Choice Collection Of Pretty Songs And Verses For The Amusement Of All Little Good Children Who Can Neither Read Nor Run : Ritson, Joseph, 1752", Internet Archive, 2017 <https://archive.org/details/gammergurtonsgar00ritsiala> [accessed 4 April 2017]

Harvey, P, "Where Was the Banbury Cross", Oxoneinsia, 1966, 83 - 106Heaney, Michael, "Kingston To Kenilworth: Early Plebeian Morris", Folklore, 100 (1989), 88-104

Opie, Iona Archibald, and Peter Opie, The Oxford Dictionary Of Nursery Rhymes, 1st edn (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997)

Opie, Iona, Joan Hassall, and Peter Opie, The Oxford Nursey Rhyme Book, 1st edn (Oxford: Clarendon Pr., 1977)

Tarot History

Ok so in today’s society tarot decks have become synonymous with mysticism, fortune telling, and the new age spiritual movements, but where did they come from and what were they originally used for?

A Modern Rider Waite Deck

First and foremost, originally Tarot decks were not used for telling fortunes but were in fact a normal deck of cards for playing games. The four suits we know and love on playing cards today – hearts, clubs, diamonds and spades were originally the four suits most associated with Tarot – batons, coins, swords and cups. These were used by Italian aristocracy to play games not unlike bridge. This type of game seems to have originated in the 1300s and then in the 1400s there is evidence of decks which had extra “trump” cards which were illustrated non-suit cards. These, therefore, could be seen to be the very first tarot decks, although it is likely that they were simply an extension of the card games played with the original cards. By the fifteen hundreds, these types of cards were being used to play storytelling style games where the cards were turned and a story, poem or rhyme had to be constructed around its meaning. It is quite possible that this began to give rise to “Playful Divination” – making up playful fortunes for each other based on the cards which fell.

Tarot were not the first form of fortune telling with cards. In fact this does seem to go back to the 1600s with decks such as the below being used. (Image courtesy of the British Museum and used under their copyright statement – not to be used for commercial purposes). Fortune telling with cards is called Cartomancy. This includes tarot as well as any other type of card-reading. (some people still use traditional playing cards to read fortunes these days as well as other variations on the theme.)

Divination cards from the 1600s

Despite this, whilst most people presume tarot reading to be an ancient art, in fact historically the very first mentions  of tarot specifically for fortune telling were not until 1750! By 1789, tarot decks for cartomancy were being created. Antoine Court de Gebelin – a French freemason – published a complex analysis of the Tarot in 1781 where he claimed that their meanings were from the Book of Thorth, (A group of texts said to be written by Thorth, the Egyptian god of writing.) This is an unsubstantiated claim, however it is the basis for Alistair Crowley’s Thorth Tarot which was developed in the early twentieth century. Ten years later a man named Jean-Baptiste Alliette, another Frenchman who was also an occultist, released the first Tarot deck designed specifically for divinatory purposes, rather than as a game or entertainment. This was heavily inspired by the work of Gebelin before him.

The Ryder Waite Deck – which was to become perhaps the most well-used deck in modern times was not developed until 1909, previous to that, the old French decks were used such as the Marseille deck pictured below.

A modern version of the Marseille Tarot Deck

The rise of Oracles

An oracle deck differs greatly from a tarot deck. It is a deck of cards, but it has no suit cards (Minor Arcana) and does not conform to set Major Arcana cards like tarot. Most tarot will contain four suits and recognisable cards  - death, the high priestess, the wheel, the tower and so forth. Whilst some modern decks deviate from this and change the name of the suits, it is these traits which denote them a tarot deck rather than an oracle deck. The popularity of Oracle decks has grown exponentially in the last half a century, often embraced for its lack of rigidity and it’s free-flow story telling. Unlike Tarot, Oracle decks have no suits, and are just a series of images.

As to origins, the term Oracle comes from ancient Greek. The ancient Greeks believed that man could communicate with Gods at certain times, at specific places and through certain gifted persons or mediums or Oracles. There is no mention of cards ever being part of that equation though! In fact, Oracle cards in the form people understand them today are a very new occurrence! They do however have roots as old as the tarot sets which were being used in the early 1800s.

Some of the earliest oracle decks seem to have been variants on tarot decks. Mlle Le Normand – a fortune teller from the mid 1800s, designed her own deck but rather than use the traditional major arcana (the “trump” picture cards which do not have a suit) she instead drew up her own including cards

The Mountain - from
the Le Normand Deck

such as “the tree” “the snake” and “the cloud”. She also did not use the Minor Arcana suit cards in her deck. The cards such as her deck and several other similar ones from this era can be viewed in the British Museum Gallery. It is unknown whether La Normand was the first to design a deck like this, but certainly hers was an early one. It was actually not published and made popular after her death. There are other remaining cards from this era which were very similar so it would appear she wasn't alone in this practice.

For a long time this was considered to be the very first Oracle deck, however cartomancy expert Robert M Place has discussed an older deck - this deck is one named the Hooper Cards or the burning serpent deck. This deck was published in 1775 and shares many similar cards to the recognised Tarot deck we know these days – the hermit, courtship, Death, Courage and so on. It is likely an influence in early tarot decks or influenced by them. It also has a number of unique cards such as “the house on the hill” and “the cloud”, and no minor arcana (suit cards). 

For both Tarot and Oracle however, one thing is certain, fortune telling using such cards come to popularity in the Victorian era. This does seem to have faded to the background until the founding of Wicca in the 1950s, where it has came back to the forefront. The emergence of occultist thought and practice in the Victorian era probably has a lot to say about this, as does the rise of the spiritualist movement amongst Victorian ladies (see my blog post on that here!).

A Gentleman Highwayman

Ok, so hands up! I'm pushing the boat out here on the "Nursery Rhyme" category! However, there is a rhyme of sorts which does enable me to post this here, in the form of a poem entitled "The Highwayman". This poem I actually found scribbled in the back of a 2nd hand book of nursery and folk songs which I purchased on Amazon, and so I was somewhat disappointed to discover that it was actually a poem written in 1906 and not a nursery rhyme after all.

The wind was a torrent of darkness among the gusty trees.

The moon was a ghostly galleon tossed upon cloudy seas.
The road was a ribbon of moonlight over the purple moor,
And the highwayman came riding
Up to the old inn-door.
He’d a French cocked-hat on his forehead, a bunch of lace at his chin,
A coat of the claret velvet, and breeches of brown doe-skin.
They fitted with never a wrinkle. His boots were up to the thigh.
And he rode with a jewelled twinkle
Under the jewelled sky.

This was all that was handwritten into my book by the previous owner, however this poem is actually slightly different in format and goes on for another good few verses which can be read online. This poem was first published in Blackwoods Magazine, in 1906.

The stereotype of an English highwayman is one which brings with it the images of romanticism and nostalgia for forgotten eras. There are few who when asked to describe such, would describe anything other than the mounted and masked “gentleman of the road” with his chivalrous manners and dashing appearance. Often the focus of historical romances these days (yes, even I wrote one of those!) the figure of the highwayman has become one of romance and historical intrigue. However, despite a few exceptions, most highwaymen can be perceived to have been simple bandits too and potentially as violent as their counterparts; the street-robbers of London in the eighteenth century. Previous research shows that they were just as capable of rape, murder and assault as other criminals of the time and it can be argued that this false image of the gentleman highwayman as a romantic figure seems to have grown exponentially during the nineteenth century
There is some debate, amongst the secondary literature as to when the romanticism of the
highwayman figure began, with some authors claiming it to be during the nineteenth century, and others claiming that the process began earlier and could already have been happening during the eighteenth century, perhaps back to the time in question itself. An example is apparent in the old bailey proceedings of a Mr Francis Peters in 1773, who was robbed on the road by a Mr William Gordon who then insisted to take his hat and wig. Mr Peters exclaimed that men of Mr Gordon’s ilk would not normally take a hat and wig, and that it was cold and he might become ill if they were taken.

"He snatch'd off my Hat and Wig. I expostulated with him on that occasion. I told him it was very unusual for men of his profession to take such things, and that it being very cold it might in-danger my health."
Mr Gordon was, however, not swayed by this and:"He swore plentifully, gave me a great deal of opprobrious Language, and told me that he would take all he could get."
This foul-mouthed highwayman took the items anyway before being spooked and fleeing,  leaving a very shocked and confused Mr Peters in his wake!

The topic of "highway robbery" is actually one which encompasses many types of crime – that being any crime which happened on the roads -  from cutthroats and robbers to rapists and assault as well as mounted robbery. Whilst the gentleman highwayman had the image of being chivalrous and polite, this was not the case for the lowlier cutthroats, robbers and pickpockets who were much feared.

By 1720, the concept of the highway robber (not to be confused with the mounted highwayman)  was a much-dreaded thing, of which people were very fearful. Part of this was due to the way crimes were reported, and the motives behind such publishing – often semi-political in their purpose. For example, in order to justify demands for harsher punishments for criminals or the highlight the need for better policing in London. From this over-the-top negative media, the term “street robber” was born, as a somewhat new type of highway robbery, with pamphlet writers including well-known writers such as Daniel Defoe describing it as “worrying”. As well as this, and owing to expansion of the urban areas, as well as the enhanced development of newspaper printing and media in the eighteenth century, suddenly news of crimes was everywhere. All types of robbery were shown to extremes to the population of eighteenth century England, whether that be negative or romanticised. 

These sources then, show a distinct bias to vilifying robbers, and have distinct agendas for the tone of their writing. Enter here, the image of a gent on a horse who doesn't need to kill his victims because his face is hidden and he can just ride away when the deed is done. This led to a distinction between this stereotype of highwaymen and street-robbers, as the street-robber was given to be an altogether different and more violent type of criminal. In response, highwaymen began to receive a more generous reputation, with some going so far as to say they were more gentlemanly, a generally nicer, more polite sort of thief overall. Thus, the concept of the polite and gallant gentleman highwayman was born.

This romanticism in itself could have, however, led to a rise in highway robbers who were not of the same ilk as before. For example, in many sources from the Old Bailey website it can be seen that the “lowly” robbers began to emulate the highwaymen in an attempt to raise their status in the criminal world. Sometimes in the robberies, it is seen that the robber stole the horses and clothing as well as belongings, too. These men, however, were no different to how they had always been and they would not follow the same “code” as their apparently more distinguished comrades.
One case, that of the cutthroat turned highwayman: John Cullingham, shows that the very guns used to rob his victim were stolen from his previous victim, Sir William Chapman. Interestingly, in this case the highwayman in question was apprehended due to his fall from his horse. This could be a coincidence but it’s also possible that a lack of experience in handling a horse could have caused this accident. If this were the case, this also lends evidence to the hypothesis of cutthroats stealing what they needed to become highwaymen.

Another possibility, based on this concept of a media-born almost socially-acceptable highwayman, is that this reputation could have become an almost desirable state to achieve for own notoriety. For example, as well as to better deceive, some men might have wanted to be perceived as a noble highwayman, rather than as a lowly criminal, especially in the glorified media state of such. With this in mind, it is highly possible that some of the cases which can be seen in the old bailey sources of the more polite and gentlemanly highwaymen, could also have been seen to be an emulation of what the perpetrator believed to be acceptable highwayman behaviour based on a stereotype.
A second and separate line of enquiry is to assess the concept of “outlaw heroes” in general.  Spraggs, in her paper on outlaws, discusses this by stating that heroes are at the very centre of society as a means to reinforce and reflect social inequality. They give both the knowledge of what is not just, and the hope of change. The concept of the highwayman was conceived as a respite from the drudgery of normal crime, and therefore rose to become a hero outlaw, but that this concept had to have rules, for example not harming women, polite manners and a chivalrous manner. This then, must have contrasted well with the lighthearted tales of folk heroes told in the early days of the era of highwaymen, such as Robin Hood and Fulke le Fitzwarin, whose tales were by then already widespread and romanticised. Certainly, by the late nineteenth century, scholars writing on the subject were including figures such as Robin Hood in the category of highwaymen. This is a topic I intend to cover in more detail on another day though.
So, did real “gentlemen” highwaymen exist? Well, yes, probably, but in truth a lot of their charms probably didn’t 😉

Sources

Brandon, D. (2011) Stand and deliver!: A history of highway robbery. 4th edn. London: History Press.
Cowden, S., Seal, G. and George, R.M. (1999) ‘The outlaw legend: A cultural tradition in Britain, America and Australia’, The Yearbook of English Studies, 29, p. 336. doi: 10.2307/3509004.
Defoe, D. (1726) A brief historical account of the lives of the six notorious street-robbers, executed at Kingston: Viz. William Blewet, Edward Bunworth, Emanuel Dickenson, Thomas Berry, John Higges, and John Legee: With a particular relation of their early introduction i. Available at: https://archive.org/details/briefhistoricala00defo (Accessed: 12 June 2016).
Johnson, C. and Whitehead, C. (1883) Lives and exploits of English Highwaymen, pirates, and robbers: Drawn from .. 4th (with additions) edn. London: Google Books.
Kelly, T.E. and Knight, S. (1997) Fouke le Fitz Waryn: Introduction | Robbins library digital projects. Available at: http://d.lib.rochester.edu/teams/text/fouke-le-fitz-waryn-introduction (Accessed: 23 April 2016).
Langbein, J.H. (2003) The origins of adversary criminal trial. (googlebooks)
Mackie, E. (2010) Rakes, Highwaymen, and pirates: The making of the modern gentleman in the .. 3rd edn. JHU Press.
Online, O.B.P. (2003c) The Value Of the Proceedings as a Historical Source. Available at: https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/static/Value.jsp#reading (Accessed: 13 June 2016).
Spraggs, G. (2001) Outlaws and Highwaymen: The cult of the robber in England from the middle ages to the nineteenth century. London: Pimlico.

All sources were found on the Old Bailey online website. https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/ Not all were discussed in this article, but all have informed my research.
Samuel Sells, John Mattocks, Violent Theft > highway robbery, 14th January 1726. Reference Number: t17260114-62 - 
John Hawkins, George Simpson, Violent Theft > highway robbery, 10th May 1722. Reference Number: t17220510-33 - 
Samuel Vevers, Violent Theft > highway robbery, 31st August 1726. Reference Number: t17260831-354 –
 John Robinson, Violent Theft > highway robbery, 16th October 1728. Reference Number: t17281016-405 - 
Thomas Hitchin, Violent Theft > highway robbery, 28th August 1730. Reference Number: t17300828-326 – 
William Gordon, Violent Theft > highway robbery, 4th April 1733. Reference Number: t17330404-447 –
 Francis Crotchet, Violent Theft > highway robbery, 10th October 1733. Reference Number: t17331010-208 – 
John Cullington, Violent Theft > highway robbery, 5th December 1733. Reference Number: t17331205-199 –
 John Freelove, Violent Theft > highway robbery, 5th December 1733.10 – 
James Macdowald, Violent Theft > highway robbery, 16th January 1734. Reference Number: t17340116-3811 – 
Thomas Taverner, Violent Theft > highway robbery, 30th June 1734. Reference Number: t17340630-412 – 
Thomas Dwyer, James O Neal, highway robbery, animal theft, 8th September 1736. Reference Number:   t17360908-1113 –
Edward Bonner, Violent Theft > highway robbery, 8th September 1736. Reference Number: t17360908-3314 – T
homas Meighill, Violent Theft > highway robbery, 26th May 1737. Reference Number: t17370526-2015 – 
William Barkwith, Violent Theft > highway robbery, 5th December 1739. Reference Number: t17391205-316 – 

Plympton House Asylum

My Favourite Pic of Plympton House - Found using Google Images Search by the Houses and Heritage facebook page. (however, sadly, the article which goes alongside this pic is largely factually incorrect when it comes to the house's years as an asylum).

 

 And yonder mansion old and strong, is now by some ill luck, (Oh! shame of story, and of song), The madhouse of Doctor Duck!^[1]

The house referred to in the anonymous verse above, is the private asylum known as Plympton House Asylum, which was opened in 1836 by Dr James Duck.

NOTE: Plympton House asylum was the focus of my Masters Degree and is one of the establishments which I am covering as part of my PhD :) The content of this blog post is made up of excerpts from my Masters thesis, and so it is copyright, however, citations might be made to said thesis using this reference: [Barrett, Emma., “The Madhouse of Doctor Duck: Plympton House Asylum 1835 – 1860” (Unpublished MA thesis, University of Plymouth, 2018)] The Thesis itself is accessible on request to Emma.Barrett@students.plymouth.ac.uk until it is formally published.

Bang in the middle of Plympton, is a walled in estate which is currently a scene of demolition and re-purposing as an old manor house and its outbuildings are being converted into an exclusive new gated housing estate. Previously a nunnery and a care home, Plympton House also has a much darker side to its history.
In 1835, at the height of reform in mental health care, a Quaker doctor named James Duck from Bristol purchased a lease on Plympton House to turn it into an insane asylum. Dr Duck was a seasoned asylum owner as, along with his brother Nehemiah, he had been running asylums for over ten years in Somerset. This is important as Quaker doctors were amongst some of the forerunners in mental health care at the time. Nehemiah and James split with James’s move from Somerset, as well as a change in religion brought about by his marriage to a non-Quaker lady. Initially, the men who inspected the asylums for the crown in Devon seemed to be pleased with the conditions there, and initially Plympton House Asylum was intended for private patrons only. Later, however, Plympton House was styled as a “House and Outbuildings” private asylum.^[2] This style of asylum was one which was rising in popularity during the early nineteenth century amongst private asylum owners who took on pauper patients who could not afford to pay for care (This being before there was any state or government-run asylums at all in Devon). The concept of a “house and outbuildings” asylum being that the well-to-do private patients were housed in the house with the family, whilst the paupers kept separately in the outbuildings.^[3]

During the 1840s, the governing bodies which inspected asylums were to change drastically, and with these changes a group of men known as the “commissioners in lunacy” were sent to inspect every single asylum in England. In their reports, Plympton House was found to be in a very poor way, especially for the pauper patients. The commissioners described the House as “Disgusting and offensive” and unfit for purpose.^[4]  They stated that Plympton House Asylum was visited three times, October 1842, July 1843 and October 1843.^[5] They open by discussing how previous visiting justices had lodged a number of complaints already, about the objectionable condition of the premises, and add that there seemed to have been no observable response to these complaints. On their first visit, the commissioners describe cramped quarters, with a room of 16 by 12 foot holding seventeen patients. The bedrooms were “Cheerless and wet, from damp or rain”. Chief in their objections too was that a room inhabited by girls, which was accessible by a male patient.Later, things had worsened even more, with patients tied to beds, restrained, dirty and confined to small dark rooms which had not been cleaned.

So what had caused Plympton House to fall into such a state? The answer is possibly down to the fact that Dr Duck began to take on pauper patients. Dr Duck doesn’t seem to have been able to fill his asylum with enough of the well-to-do patients, or perhaps the local governing bodies of Devon were desperate for somewhere to send the mentally unwell of the county. Whichever is the case, it would seem that the conditions declined when pauper patients were admitted.In 1843, Dr Duck left for America, leaving his family member by marriage, a Dr Richard Langworthy in charge of the asylum. The Langworthy family were another seasoned family of asylum owners, also from Devon, Somerset and Bath. Shortly after, the Devon County Asylum opened its doors and all of the pauper patients in Plympton House were transferred back in to government care. After this, for a time, the inspectors found Plympton house to be much improved, however in the 1850s the house was once again falling into disrepair and the conditions worsened. It can be no coincidence that it was during this time that the Devon County Asylum had become full, and pauper patients were being sent once more back to Plympton House. Thus the pattern began again.
Plympton House remained an asylum for many years after this, and then eventually was taken over by a group of nuns who turned it into a care home.

Further Reading:
Primary: “Plympton House Asylum” Exeter and Plymouth Gazette 3^rd June 1843 p.3“Fullands House Lunatic Asylum” Western Times, 5^th September 1828, p.3“Lunatic Asylum, Ridgeway House” Bristol Mercury 14^th February 1820, p.2“Taunton – Lunatic Asylum” Exeter Flying Post, 25^th January 1821, p4“Dr James Duck”, Taunton courier , 18^th May 1829, p4“Lunatic Asylum – Plympton House” North Devon Journal , 23 July 1835, p.3“Plympton House Lunatic Asylum Near Plymouth”, Sherborne mercury, 3^rd August 1836, p.1“Preservation of a Testimonial to Dr Cookworthy” Western Daily Mercury, 27th July 1869 p.3Report of the Metropolitan Commissioners in Lunacy to the Lord Chancellor, Parliamentary Papers [henceforth “PP”], 1844, No. 1, Vol. 26, XXVI.
Books.There are no books specifically on Plympton House (until mine comes out!), but these might be of interest:
Johnathan Andrews and Andrew Scull, Customers and patrons of the mad-trade : the management of lunacy in eighteenth-century London ; with the complete text of John Monro's 1766 case book (London : University of California Press, 2003)Charlotte Mackenzie, Psychiatry for The Rich (London: Routledge, 2005)Peter Nolan, A History Of Mental Health Nursing, 2nd edn (London: Stanley Thornes, 1993)William L Parry Jones, The Trade in Lunacy (Originally printed 1972, Reprinted London: Routledge, 2006)
There are also a wealth of academic journals and articles on the subject of insane asylums – go to Google Scholar and search terms such as “lunatic asylum”

Picture Courtesy of Plymouth Herald: https://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/news/plymouth-news/behind-walls-secret-plymouth-mansion-700979

---

[1] An anonymous rhyme dated at approx. 1840, collected and cited by J.G. Commin, Devon Notes and Queries , 30, 1967 p. 20[2] Report of the Metropolitan Commissioners in Lunacy to the Lord Chancellor, Parliamentary Papers, 1844, No. 1, Vol. XXVI, pp. 60[3] . J.K. Walton, Casting out and Bringing Back in Victorian England: pauper lunatics, 1840-70, in W.F. Bynum, R. Porter and M. Shepherd (eds), The anatomy of madness, vol. II, London, Tavistock Publications, 1985, pp. 132[4] Report of the Metropolitan Commissioners in Lunacy 1844, pp. 62[5] Report of the Metropolitan Commissioners in Lunacy 1844, pp.60-65

Nursery Rhymes - Ladybird Ladybird

 

Baring-Gould's 1962 "Annotated mother goose", about halfway through, gives a very stark little rhyme, which reads:

Ladybird, ladybird 

Fly away home 

Your house is on fire And your children will burn[1]

Now, I remember this from my own childhood with a still horrific but slightly more gentle

Ladybird, ladybird Fly away home 

Your house is on fire 

And your children are alone 

Occasionally adding a final line: 
All except Little Anne, Who’s hiding under the frying pan![2]

Of course, as a child, there seemed nothing at all amiss about ladybird’s houses being aflame, but as an adult this is another rhyme which feels like it must have some other hidden meaning within!

Ok, so as always, I first like to turn to trying to find origins and early publishing dates. the earliest I could find for this particular one is actually right back in the 1700s to the original Tommy Thumb booklet! It does also appear to be in the form of the less optimistic original telling there.[3] Tommy

Thumb’s little song book is actually considered to be the oldest surviving book of nursery rhymes, and so most of the content are likely older, but no other examples survive in collections like this. As yet, this is the earliest version of Ladybird, Ladybird I have found. Other places it might exist, especially if it does turn out to be topical, are on old broadsheets or pamphlets However, thus far none of these seem to survive. Tommy Thumb’s song book, incidentally, might actually be one of the earliest books designed for children ever put to the printers![4]

Our friend James Orchard Halliwell seems to have been one of the first to add the final line with his 1842 rendition:

Lady bird, lady bird, fly away home, Thy house is on fire, thy children all gone, All but one, and her name is Ann, And she crept under the pudding-pan[5]. 

So, what’s it about? Who is the ladybird and why was her house on fire?

One of the main theories I have come across in texts old and new, is that this rhyme about religious persecution. People don’t seem to agree, however, on who it was being aimed at!

Theories range from it being a repression of the ancient gods in favour of the masculine sky gods of ancient Greece, to the repression of British and Celtic paganism, with the first line being a taunt of “you are defeated” to the latter, newer lines being a nod to the fact that paganism survived.[6] Despite being a pagan myself, and delighting in this idea, it is actually highly unlikely that this rhyme is this old despite that throughout many cultures Ladybirds have been considered sacred for eons and are
thought to bring luck to those who they land on.

Another theory, especially since this rhyme was very likely known during the 1500 and 1600s, is that it was actually being aimed at Catholics, with the actual word “ladybird” deriving from “our lady” originally.[7] With this in mind, this actually begins to pull together. The form of this rhyme is very similar in form to other rhymes written in the 16th century, (little Bo Peep, for example) and possibly carries a subtle nod to the virgin Mary, so I would surmise it likely to be a nod to the persecution of Catholics during the reign of Elizabeth 1st. Fly away home because your homes are burning and your families at risk. As for Ann – well, to go there, I’d just be guessing with no evidence so I won’t fall into that trap! 😊

Final words on this one are that it does seem that nobody really knows and so this one falls a little more into obcurity.

[1] William Barring-Gould, Annotated mother goose, (New York: Bramhall House Publishing) 1962, p.209
[2] Or, as cited in Chris Roberts, Heavy Words Lightly thrown (London: Granta) 2004, p.53 “Under the warming pan”
[3] Mary Cooper, Tommy Thumb's Pretty Song Book, (London) 1744, p.5. Copy held by the British library - The British Library, 2017 <https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/tommy-thumbs-pretty-song-book> [accessed 11 April 2017]
[4] British Library, Tommy Thumb’s Pretty Songbook, https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/tommy-thumbs-pretty-song-book
[5] James Orchard Halliwell, The Nursery Rhymes of England: Collected Principally from Oral Tradition, (London: The Percy Society) 1842 p158
[6] Opie and Opie p.309
[7] Michael Majerus, A natural History of Ladybirds, (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press) 2016, p.2