Dr. Grissea Fox (who also writes as Emma Barrett-Brown) is an author and historian from Plymouth, Devon. Here she presents bite-sized portions of local history, folklore, and so called "dark" history on her Official Blog.
Another nursery rhyme post to get me back into the swing of
posting! The other day my partner and I were discussing Jack and Jill and what
some of the elements of the rhyme might mean so I thought I would break it down
for you (and him!)
Firstly, let’s look at the lyrics:
Jack and Jill went up the hill to fetch a pail of water
Jack fell down and broke his crown
And jill came tumbling after.
Up Jack got and home did trot as fast as he could caper
And went to bed to mend his head
With vinegar and brown paper.
Now, anyone who has read my other nursery rhyme analysis
(which is available here!) will know that often rhymes like this are
metaphorical and tend to relate to real people or events.
I’ll start with a bit of language analysis. Let’s first look
at the word “Crown” – most people accept that Jack’s broken crown is in fact
the top of his head and that is perfectly plausible in the circumstances,
especially with the final lines to “mend his head”, so that is the most likely
usage here. There is a theory circulating online, however, that the word crown
might be more literal! This theory states that Jack and Jill were in fact the
poor deposed and executed monarchs Louis XViii and his infamous queen Marie
Antoinette! This seems to be a common theme from what I have seen online, and
certainly it seems to fit the bill – he fell and lost his crown and she came tumbling
after. It certainly could be describing those events. The extra evidence of
this given is that most people cite the first publication of the rhyme to be in
1795, two years after the pair fell to the guillotine… HOWEVER, this does not check
out and this rumour seems to have become an easily passed on myth! From my
research I have found a copy in 1777,[1]
and previous to that in 1765! So Jack and Jill is categorically NOT
about the French royalty of the revolution! Myth busted!
Printed in a 1777 songbook - see footnote 1
So, how old is Jack and Jill? That is the next question! The
first full publication of the rhyme I can find is currently 1765, however, I
have found references to Jack and Jill earlier! In 1744, an epic poem about the English Revolution
cites:
This rhyme was said to date from 1661. Now, to complicate
matters, it is true that the phrase “Jack and Jill” was often used to generally
describe and man and woman, often married (as early as Shakespeare), however it
is what it is accompanied by in this rhyme that caught my attention. Tom Thumb
for example being a creature of English Folklore. (Conversely, however, Wat
Tiller / Tyler was a real man who fought a rebellion against the crown in 1377,
however – like “Robin Hood” figures, his deeds are often remembered with folklore-like
twists of nostalgia and hero-worship). With the extra addition that this verse
speaks of music changing from merry to battle, and with reference to old
customs, could Jack and Jill actually be some lost element of English folklore?
This theory goes back further too! With a reference from the
1690s which refers to Jack and Jill as a children’s story! [3]
For my part, I would as soon commend the children's stories of Tom Thumb - and of Jack and Jill
- See footnote 3!
With this in mind, let’s have a look at any theories which
are said to originate prior to this!
“Jack and Jill Hill” in somerset is supposed to the actual
hill from the rhyme and gives a local folklore tale to explain it. This hill in
the 1805 original ordinance survey maps is actually entitled “Bram Hill”[4].
The tale told is a simple one, that a woman – Gill - was pregnant and that her
husband fell and died on Bram hill.[5]
The grief-stricken woman also died soon after and so her child was brought up
by the villagers, thus leading to the common usage of the surname Gilson in
that area. The evidence added is that in the 1765 Mother Goose version of the rhyme,
the spelling is “Gill” rather than Jill. This was supposed to have happened in 1697
however and so at once, this falls after the first mentions we have heard of
Jack and Jill as a “children’s story”. This
research also ties in with an earlier assumption made by Opie and Opie that the
form of the rhyme and the words used are from the seventeenth century (1600s) at
least.[6]
There is of course, the possibility that the rhyme
originated here using references to a previous children’s story which would
explain the links made here. However, I find this to be somewhat charming, but
unlikely.
One final set of theories is that the rhyme has Tudor or
Stuart Origin. Some say it was to do with
the execution of two noblemen, another that it was more to do with changes to
the size of measures for tax purposes (As in, a tax bill was blocked so instead
of raising taxes, the monarch – Charles I – reduced the size of the measure
instead) involving the archaic measurements of a Jack (Or Jigger) and a Gill.
To conclude. As ever with this type of thing, we never can know for sure the
origins of this rhyme, however, my money is on it being an old lost piece of
folklore – a “children’s” story which over the years was morphed into the rhyme
as we know it today. I can tell you for certain that it was not about Marie
Antoinette and her unlucky husband, and it seems unlikely that it was about
Gill of Somerset and her untimely demise.
[1] John
Arnold, The Essex Harmony ... Vol.ii. The Second Edition with large
Additions, 1777 (London: J Buckland Printers), p.130
[2] I
have modified the language used to make it accessible for the non-historians
out there! If you would like to see it in its original form, see Harleian
Miscellany, Or a Collection of Scarce, Curious, and rare pamphlets and tracts,
1744, Volume 2, Page 508, (available free to read on google books.)
[3] Vindiciæ
Anti-Baxterianæ: or, Some Animadversions on a book, intituled the life of Mr Rihard
Baxter, 1696, (London, Richard Standfast Dist), p.202.
[4] As
can be seen here: https://tinyurl.com/5n6s82nn
[5]
This theory is available to read in many blogs and websites, an example is: https://www.theimportanceofbeingtrivial.com/where-jack-and-jill-really-did-go-up-the-hill.html
[6]
Opie and Opie, The Oxford Dictionary of Nursery Rhymes (London: )p.
Hello all! As some of you will be aware, I am (and have been for some time) working on a creative non-fiction book about local ghost stories called "Conversations About Ghosts" and I would like to share a ghost story from that collection with you as well as some of my research surrounding it. This story was told to me by my mother, and was one of her "real life" experiences. Here's the story:
‘When I was a fair bit
younger than I am now, and pregnant with my second to last. Me and M (her
ex-husband) decided to take Rex – my old collie –
for a walk up in the countryside behind the house. It was late in the afternoon
but it was summer so we set out into the fields with our picnic and a book
each. We were still fairly newly married at the time, with baby on the way. I didn’t want to walk too far so we stuck to the fields opposite the house
and then settled down in the grass. I guess my mum had the other kids as it was
just me and M. Rex didn’t need a lead as there were no sheep or anything around so
we just let him off to explore and play - irresponsible, maybe - but we were young and it was normal for us when walking him. We stayed in the fields which run
alongside the lane until evening began to really creep in, when the air got
more chill we decided to call it a day and packed up our things. I called Rex
back from the other end of the field by a gate where he was sniffing about... but he didn’t come. I called again and nothing - then he started to
bark, deep and booming, growling barks. Now, Rex was a really friendly dog! He
never barked aggressively (although being a collie, excited barking was a
different matter). This sounded fairly threatening though and so, embarrassed,
I ran up to grab him. The naughty thing was at one of the stiles which go over
into a lane behind, and when he saw us coming he jumped over the short fence. I was
astounded, this was so out of character! He was normally such a good dog
but he was obviously really wound up. M and I ditched our bag by the stile, I climbed
over into the lane to grab the dog and M followed. There, we were surprised (and initially somewhat
relieved) not to find a person or perhaps another dog as the object of Rex’s
ire, but in fact a very small and compact patch of mist.
Then confusion rose
again.
Why on earth was the stupid dog barking at mist? So, I was a bit spooked, I won’t lie. The lane is very spooky anyway, deserted with not a house in sight, just tall hedges and countryside. This wasn’t the first spooky thing I
have seen in my life,but it was just odd and weird and I was pregnant and tired and not in the mood.
I looked at M to see he seemed to share my feelings, lips pressed and eyes wary.
I called firmly to Rex who was, just by the way, on the other side of the damn
mist. He ignored me. Completely. We tried walking away and calling him but he
just stayed, ‘ruprupruprup’ a few growls, then back to the barking. In the
whole time I’d owned him, I’d only ever seen Rex do this once before, and that
was when M and I had had a big row and he’d got between us. Even then, he’d
not growled, just barked, so this was a whole new experience. As I looked at the mist too, I got a weird feeling about it. It kind of looked a bit like a person's outline, a man - taller than me - definite head shape, but with a undefined body and then tapers which looked like arms and legs. Even as I stood puzzling on it, M put a hand on my shoulder - I physically jumped - right out of my skin. 'Annie,' he said, 'does that... does that look like a person?' I was glad he'd said it first. I said nothing but managed to nod. It was right next to us, not moving - still and normal, but with my dog barking madly on the other side. 'I'm going to have to get him,' I said, but I was still reluctant to touch the misty figure. I wet my lips and then suddenly, I stepped forward and grabbed the dog's collar. It was like walking into a freezer! I started shivering almost in the - what - 2 seconds I was in there? I grabbed for the dog and I managed to get him and then I tell you, I was over that stile in a second and gone!
And that was her story, a story she told over and over again! Now, I am sure, like me as a young skeptic that I was, you are probably thinking "come on, that was just mist", but even if it was, my mother wasn't the only person to tell me a story about that exact same place! (you'll have to wait for the book to hear the rest!) Let me show you my little map from my notes...
On the graphic included above, points A to E are places where the stories I have gathered about this lane are said to have happened, to the best of my knowledge from piecing it together from the stories. There is also a missing point F and G because I am unsure where exactly in the lane these encounters happened. So straight off the bat, there seems to be a lot of ghost stories originating about this same lane.
In part, this can be put down to the fact that stories travel - especially on little estates like ours, and the lane is very quiet and eerie, especially in early morning or at twilight! It would only take a person to hear a story such as my mothers and then find themselves alone walking their dog as the sun is dipping to start to feel that chill on your spine. Having walked it myself many a time, I can tell you that both sides of the lane are set in by tall hedges with only the occasional gate to break the trees. As my mum described, there were no houses really anywhere close by it, aside from an old place called Butteville House (built 1820s) just on the edge of the lane. It’s a popular spot for both hiking and dog walking as no cars are allowed up it past Butteville.
The picturesque Buttville House, Kingsbridge, alongside which the lane runs. Image from Strutt and Parker Estate Agents
The floor is uneven, some old broken cobbles still remaining here and there but mostly mud and stones. It runs for a good mile, before splitting into two parts, one of which returns you to the housing estates, the other which snakes off towards the now modern road to the next village. As far as I can gather, Mum and M were in the first part of the lane, still, before it broke into two.
"But this is a history blog, Emma!" I hear you shout, "so let's do some history!"
Ok! Let's do some history! A quick glance at some old maps shows me that the "lane" is actually all that remains of the old road from my hometown to another little village nearby, although it no longer goes that far. The first thing that is interesting is that whilst the "lane" proper seems to have been a road, the offshoot looks more like it was a footpath and went a slightly different way. This holds up to walk it as that part of the lane is much narrower and meets a modern road which did not exist then.
This is from the 1886 Ordinance Survey
By 1938 however, the roads on the map were then labelled with road names, however "the lane" - whilst marked, is not named, therefore leading me to believe that sometime between 1886 and 1938 this road fell into disuse!
A theory put about in local myth and told to me at least twice was that it was a condemned man making his last walk to the gallows, however since there never was a gallows in Kingsbridge along this road, that can purely be put down to myth! I did look a little further into this just in case, using internet newspaper archives. Turns out there was only one instance of highway robbery reported in the town and it was on a completely different road. Searches for Butteville and Buttville came up with only births and deaths at the house! There was an unexpected death at nearby Washbrook Mill in 1899, however it was an elderly woman who died after feeling unwell rather than anything nefarious. No accidental deaths were even recorded on the road!
And so all leads came to nothing!
This is the part of doing this sort of research that the spooky ghostly documentaries and "ghost hunter" shows never tell you - I'd say 90% of my research into these sorts of hauntings lead to nothing when you start to explore the history - of course the older a building or place, the more likely it is to throw up something relatable, but not always! This was one of those cases. So, why are so many people experiencing weird phenomena on an apparently unremarkable road? Who knows!
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.
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 4th 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!
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 25th 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 15th 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 16th 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 13th 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)
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!).
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 –
.jpg)
.jpg)
The wind was a torrent of darkness among the gusty trees.
