The shaming of Agnes Leman cont.

Norwich Mayor's Court Book NCR/16a/7 1555-62, fol. 521
Extract dated 10th September 1561.....

T(h)is day Angnes Leman wedowe for that she was taken vpon Sundaye nyght last past in the Cockey lane w(i)th one John Gorney in the comytting the abomynable acte of whordome / Yt ys this daye ordeyned that at one of the clock at afternoone she shall be taken oute of prison and lede abowte the markett and so by my lordes howse and ov(er) Coslany brydge and to seynt Georges and ov(er) Fyebrigg w(i)th a bason tynklyd before hyr and so set upon the cuckingstoole and ducked in the water/ And from thens to cum with a bason tynked before her vp tum lande and seynt Andrew and so to saynt Stephens.

There are many things that can be said about this extract....

Firstly the surname Leman or Leaman could mean 'lover' or 'Prostitute' and so I suppose if you were feeling uncharitable you could say that Agnes may have had quite a reputation already! And Agnes is listed as a widow, which meant that she probably had no other means of support other than what she could earn herself. On the other hand, it may well be be a coincidence as surnames had already been in common use from the 13th-14th century onwards.

More importantly the extract is quite unusual in the amount of detail it contains. Detailing how she was to be carted from the market place, through at least three other parishes before being ducked and then carted back to her home parish of St Stephens. A normal order for ducking would be short and with little extra humiliation. An example from July 1560, simply states.. This daye Alys cocker the wyfe of Will(ia)m Cocker was ducked vpon a cokingstole for a com(m) en skolde and braller. NCR/16a/7, fol 401. Although Alice's crimes were deemed less extreme than those of Agnes (A scold is merely an argumentative wife) the detailed extra shaming in Agnes's case suggests that she was a persistent offender and so singled out in the court.

The other thing to say is that duckings were seen as a particularly cruel punishment even in Tudor times and so not that common. Some people will tell you that the stool on Fyebridge in Norwich was in continual use, but in the early 1600s there were on average only two cases a year. Even then there are cases of duckings being suspended in cold weather and evidence of women set upon the ducking stool, but not actually ducked, although when they were ducked it was common place to duck them three times... diving and ducking down, though against their will as ducks do under the water, William Sheppard, A grande abridgment of common and statute law (1695)

It must be remembered that the punishment was not just about the actual ducking, but also the other humiliation such as the... bason tynklyd before hyr and other loud discordant 'rough music' that often accompanied duckings and is said to have symbolized the woman's' disordered behavior.

The other thing that stands out about the Agnes Leman case is that there is no mention of John Gorney's punishment, but this was unusual and should not be taken as the norm. Firstly men were sometimes ducked, although this tended to be for 'ill rule' (Disorderly behavior) And men accused of whoredom would often suffer whipping at the carts tail about the market place, a punishment very rarely meted out on Women. If they were whipped it would be at the post or in private. We must not fall for the typical way of thinking that women's place was much worse in Tudor times and that their lower place in society was accepted by them or their men. Indeed, there is evidence that many men were willing to stand up for women. In the following year after Agnes was ducked a young women called Bennet Goodwyn was caught in a garden committing whoredom with William Tesmonde. It was ordered that she ride in a cart with a paper on her head describing her crime and that she would be processed with rough music and finally ducked. But there is no mention of a punishment for William and it turns out that he was a well connected young man! Clearly this rankled with some in Tudor Norwich, because her punishment did not go smoothly. We know this because in September of 1562 Robert Lloyd came before the Mayor's Court, because on... the xviii daye of July last past ... he tooke the pap(er) from the hed of one Bennet goodwyn .... [and did].. cast it into the ryver.

The point is that you can't generalize about history. Certainly there were laws that often treated woman harshly, but we mustn't assume that these laws were always rigidly applied or supported. There are those who would have you believe that life was hard for all of the lower orders of medieval and Tudor times, but its simply not always true.

And while we are on the subject, the ducking stool was not used to swim witches (The punishment of witches will be the subject of my next blog) And if you are ever on a dungeon tour at Norwich Castle Museum looking at the Victorian copy of the ducking stool, you will also see some scolds bridles and no doubt be told that these were in common use.. Put over a woman's head, the spiked plate forced into her mouth to stop her talking. But these are also copies; copies of copies and there is no evidence to show that bridles were ever used in the southern parts of England at any time.

But don't be discouraged by all this debunking, for if you continue reading this blog you will see that truth can be just as strange and exciting as the fiction often put about at heritage sites, museums and on the web. And hopefully you will see that people in the past were not that different to us, which by my reckoning should make them very strange and exciting indeed!